Full text of "Digest of masonic law:"

See other formats

o, ♦*7V«* A

<j» **>^53% <>r o •recur*'** O "**, **»\V^\Ss> * N

fc V* rtttt: V .-Mtt- %^ .i

.0'

~V . - - «X»

DIGEST

MASONIC LAW:

BEING A COMPLETE CODE OF

Regulations, Decisions, and Opinions,

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC JURISPRUDENCE,

Y •
BY GEO. WINGATE CHASE,

Author of the Masonic Harp ; Freemason's Pocket Library ; History of Haverhill, Mass., &o.

IFTH EDITION.

BOSTON:

A. W. POLLARD & CO. A. WILLIAMS & CO.

New York: CLARK & MAYNARD.

1865.

X\ DK

Entered according to Act of Congress in the year 1865, by

GEO. WINGATE CHASE,

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts.

Z*r U

Press of Geo. C. Rand & Avery,
3 Cornhill, Boston.

3T THE

MOST WORSHIPFUL GRAND LODGE

PEEE AND ACCEPTED MASONS

FOE THE

STATE OF MAINE,
(f${* Matter (Kranfc fLotofl*,)

AS A

MARK OF ESTEEM FOR ITS INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS,

AND

GRATITUDE FOR ITS EARLY

ENCOURAGEMENT AND SUPPORT,
THIS VOLUME

IS FRATERNALLY DEDICATED
BY THE AUTHOR.

PREFACE

The following pages, like many others, if book " Prefaces'*
san be believed, owe their preparation and publication to the in-
dividual want of their Compiler. As Editor of a Masonic paper,
and Master of a Masonic Lodge, he was so frequently called upon
to answer, decide, or give his opinion, on questions and points
of Masonic Law, Usage and Regulation, that the great need, and
obvious practical value and convenience, of a Masonic Digest, or
book of reference, forcibly presented itself to his mind. As no
such book was to be had, he set about preparing one for his own
private use ; and having purchased one of ' ' Todd's Index Rerums, ' '
commenced an index of all his masonic reading that seemed
worth the trouble. After nearly filling the book, and finding it
insufficient, and not properly arranged for masonic purposes, he
had a larger one made, upon an improved plan, suggested by his
previous experience. Into this he indexed the most material
dates, facts, regulations, decisions, opinions, &c, &o, in his ma-
sonic library, and entered all new ones as fast as received ; and in
time, this Index Rerum became the most valuable and most indis-
pensable, of all his masonic books.

The frequently expressed wish that he would publish it, or pre-
pare a work from it, and the acknowledged want of a compend,
or digest, of masonic law, for the use of lodges, and especially of
Masters of Lodges, at last induced him to set about the task; and
now, after much care and labor, he presents to the fraternity this
work, which he has entitled a " Digest of Masonic Law," in the
hope that it may be found of practical value.

The work is not properly a commentary on Masonic Law, or a
series of discussions, or dissertations, upon Masonic Law ; but is a
collection of regulations, decisions, and opinions, carefully con-
densed, and arranged under appropriate heads. In most cases,
the reasons, or arguments, upon which the decision or opinion, is
based, are not given ; and in many instances the precise language
is not quoted. Care has, however, been taken to preserve the
true meaning of the original, and with this view the more im
portent words have in all cases been retained.

VI PREFACE.

The work is not intended to supersede a reference to the pub-
lished Constitutions of any particular jurisdiction, but as a guide
to the general law or opinions of the fratrnity.

As a general rule, only so much has been quoted as would illus-
trate, or had special reference to, the particular point under con-
sideration ; hut the desire to make the work as useful as possible,
has led to some exceptions to the rule. Eepetition has been
avoided as much as seemed allowable in a work of the kind.

When references are not made to any particular American
Masonic Constitution, it will be understood that such Constitu-
tion is silent upon the point under consideration.

Much pains have been taken to arrange and classify ; yet it will
be found necessary, in many cases, to "read up" on all points
bearing upon the one under investigation.

Some of the quotations and references have been taken at
second-hand, and, perhaps, are not, in all cases, correctly given ;
yet it is hoped and believed that such instances are but few.

Where there is a difference of opinion, &c. , upon any point, it
has been intended to place the authorities on each side by them-
selves. In some instances these have become somewhat " mixed
up," for which is offered as excuse, the fact, that author and
printer have been some two hundred miles apart during the
whole time the manuscript has been in the latter' s hands.

The first paragraph under each head, or subdivision, when not
otherwise credited, will be understood as the individual opinion
of the compiler. In giving it, he has endeavored to be sparing
of words, correct in statement, and just in conclusion. As a
masonic author, or journalist, he is not aware of having pet the-
ories to maintain, or favorite hobbies to ride.

No apology is considered necessary for compiling and publish-
ing the great diversity of opinions, regulations, and usages, upon
many important points. That such a diversity exists, is patent
to all ; and by thus, and for the first time, setting them side by
side, that their inconsistencies may be the more readily seen, and
promptly remedied, the compiler believes he has opened a way
for an earlier and more perfect uniformity.

With a full knowledge of many imperfections in the work, the
compiler can only point to the previously unbroken path in the
wilderness before him ; solicit for his labors an indulgent fraternal
criticism ; and express the hope that, as his intention has been a
laudable one, his labors will meet the approval of his masonic
brethren.

Haverhill, Mass., Oct. 1, 1859.

GBAXD LODGES

ORIGTX OF.

Graxd Lodges, as at present organized, are of compara-
tively mcwiern date. Originally each lodge was an independ-
ent body, acknowledging no superior. A number of m:.-
not less than seven, meeting together, were, by ancient m
empowered to practise the rights of masonry, without a
charter, or warrant of constitution. This privilege was in-
herent in them as Individ q a

The first notice we find of the formation or existence of a
supreme controlling masonic body, is contained in an old

-- . one said to have been in the possession of Nicholas
~;ulptor under the celebrated Inigo Jones. This
MSSs which w;.- ritib many others, in 1720.

tained the following :*

•• Bt Albanf loved masons well, and cherished them much,
and made their pay right good. And he gott them a char-
ter from the king* and his counsell. for to hold a general
counsel!, and gave in to name Assembhe. Thereat he was
himselfe. and did help to make masons, and gave them good
charges. "

Whether this * Assembhe" ever met again, or not. we have
now no means of knowing.

* Pres. m> 103.

t Albanus was born at Terulam. (now St. Albans, in Hertfordshire, England)
of a noble family. In his youth he traveled to Borne, where he served seven
year: under the Emperor Pioclenan, On his return home, he was converted to
the Christian faith ; and. in the tenth and last persecution of the Christians, waa
beheaded. A. D.. 303. He was the first who suffered martyrdom for the Chris-
tian religion, in Britain.— lb 104.

X Caraasras, A. D., 287.

8 GRAND LODGES.

The next general assembly of the craft, of which any re-
cord has come down to us, was that convened at York, in
England, in 926, by Prince Edwin, the brother, of king Athel-
stane, and the grandson of Alfred the Great.* Prince
Edwin procured a charter from Athelstane, empowering the
masons to meet annually at York, at which city king Athel-
stane then kept his court. A record written in the reign of
Edward IY, said to have been in the possession of the famous
Elias Ashmole, founder of the Museum at Oxford, and which
was unfortunately destroyed at the revolution, contained the
following :f

"That the said king's brother, Prince Edwin, being taught
masonry, and taking upon him the charges of a master mason,
for the love he had to the said craft, and the honorable prin-
ciples whereon it is grounded, purchased a free charter of
King Athelstane, for the masons ; having a correction among
themselves (as it was anciently expressed), or a freedom and
power to regulate themselves, to amend what might happen
amiss, and to hold a yearly communication and general as-
sembly.

" That, accordingly, Prince Edwin summoned all the ma-
sons in the realm to meet him in a congregation at York, who
came, and composed a general lodge, of which he was Grand
Master ; and having brought with them all the writings and
records extant, some in Greek, some in Latin, some in French,
and other languages, from the contents thereof, that assembly
did frame the Constitutions and Charges of an English lodge,
made a law to preserve and observe the same in all time
coming, and ordained good pay for working masons," &c.

The granting of this charter, at this time, would seem to
be conclusive that the assemblies of the craft under the char-
ter of Carausius, had long since ceased to be held.

The Constitutions and Charges framed by this assembly,
are known as the " Gothic Constitutions," which, being re-
vised by Dr. Anderson, in 1720,$ are now designated as

* Pres. 111., 107.
f Pres. HI., 108.
X First published in 1723,

GRAND LODGES. 9

"Anderson's Constitutions," or as the "Ancient Charges of a
Freemason," and are universally considered as the highest
written masonic authority.

For nearly eight hundred years subsequent to 926, these
yearly general assemblies were held at York, with but few
interruptions. They were not, in the sense we now under-
stand it, a " Grand Lodge," but a " General Assembly of Ma-
sons," being composed of as many of the fraternity at large,
as, being within convenient distance, could attend, under
the auspices of one general head, who was elected and in-
stalled at one of these meetings, and who, for the time being,
received homage as the governor of the whole body. The
idea of confining the privileges of masonry, by a warrant or
charter, to certain individuals, convened on certain days and
at certain places, had then no existence. Any brethren,
competent to discharge the duty, were authorized to open
and hold lodges, at their discretion, at such times and places
as best suited their convenience, and then and there initiate
members into the order.*

At the general assembly held in 1663, on the festival
of St. John the Evangelist, regulations were adopted, re-
quiring,

1. " That no person, of what degree soever, be made or
accepted a freemason, unless in a regular lodge, whereof one
to be a Master or a Warden in that limit or division where
such lodge is kept, and another to be a craftsman in the
trade of Freemasonry.

2. " That no person hereafter shall be accepted a freema-
son, but such as are of able body, honest parentage, good
reputation, and an observer of the laws of the land.

3. " That no person, hereafter, who shall be accepted a
freemason, shall be admitted into any lodge or assembly,
until he has brought a certificate of the time and place of his
acceptation, from the lodge that accepted him, unto the
master of that limit or division where such lodge is kept.
And the said master shall enroll the same in a roll of parch-

* Pres. 111., 109.

10 GRAND LODGES.

ment to be kept for that purpose and shall give an account
of all such acceptations, at every general assembly.

4. " That every person who is now a freemason, shall bring
to the master a note of the time of his acceptation, to the
end the same may be enrolled in such priority of place as
the brother deserves ; and that the whole company and fel-
lows may the better know each other.

5. " That, for the future, the said fraternity of Freemasons
shall be regulated and governed by one Grand Master, and
as many Wardens as the said society shall think fit to
appoint at every annual general assembly.

6. " That no person shall be accepted, unless he be twenty-
one years old, or more."

These regulations are the first we can find, that explicitly
acknowledged the general assembly as the governing body
of the fraternity, and required private lodges to give an
account of all their acceptations to it.

After the death of King William, in 1702, who was a mason,
and a great patron of the craft, the institution began to lan-
guish— the lodges decreased in number, and the general
assembly was entirely neglected, for many years. The old
lodge of St. Paul, and a few others, continued to meet regu-
larly, but consisted of few members.*

On the accession of George I., the masons in London and
its environs, resolved to revive the communications and
annual festivals of the society. With this view, the lodges
at the Goose and Gridiron, in St. Paul's church-yard ; the
Crown, in Parker's-lane, near Drury-lane ; the Apple-Tree
Tavern, in Charles street, Covent Garden, and the Rummer
and Grapes Tavern, in Channel-row, Westminster, (the only
lodges in being in the south of England, at that time) with
some other old brethren, met at the Apple-Tree Tavern above
mentioned, in February, 1717, and, having voted the oldest
master mason, then present, into the chair, " constituted
themselves a Grand Lodge, pro tempore "f resolved to revive
the quarterly communication s of the fraternity ; to hold the

* Book Consts., ed. 1738, p. 108.
■}■ Prestcu, 150.

GRAND LODGES. U

annual assembly and feast on the 24th June, and then to
choose a Grand Master.

Accordingly, on the 24th of June, 1717, the assembly arid
feast were held at the Goose and Gridiron, in St. Paul's
church-yard, (in compliment to the oldest lodge, which met
there) and the oldest master mason, and master of a lodge,
having taken the chair, a list of candidates for the office of
Grand Master was produced, out of which, " by a great
majority of hands," the brethren elected Mr. Anthony Sayer,
Grand Master of Masons, for the ensuing year, who was
forthwith invested by the said oldest master, and installed
by the Master of the oldest lodge.

The Grand Master then appointed his Wardens, (Captain
Joseph Elliott, and Mr. Jacob Lamball) and commanded the
brethren of the four lodges to meet him and his Wardens
quarterly in communication.

Among the regulations which were proposed and agreed
to, at this meeting, was the following :

" That the privilege of assembling as masons, which had
been hitherto unlimited, should be vested in certain lodges,
or assemblies of masons, convened in certain places ; and
that every lodge to be hereafter convened, except the four
old lodges, at this time existing, should be legally author-
ized to act by a warrant from the Grand Master, for the time
being, granted to certain individuals by petition, with the
consent and approbation of the Grand Lodge, in communica-
tion ; and that without such warrant, no lodge should be
hereafter deemed regular or constitutional."

In consequence of this regulation, several new lodges were
soon after convened in London, and its environs, and the
Masters and Wardens of them were commanded to attend
the meetings of the Grand Lodge, make a regular report of
their proceedings, and transmit to the Grand Master, from
time to time, a copy of any by-laws they might form for their
own government.

In compliment to the brethren of the four old lodges, by
wnom the Grand Lodge was first formed, it was resolved,
"That every privilege which thev collectively enjoyed, by

12 GRAND LODGES.

virtue of their immemorial rights, they should still continue
to enjoy ; and that no law, rule, or regulation, to be hereafter
made or passed in the Grand Lodge, should ever deprive
them of such privilege, or encroach on any landmark which
was at that time established as the standard of masonic
government."

This resolution being confirmed, the old masons in the
metropolis, agreeably to the resolution of the brethren at
large, vested all their inherent privileges, as individuals, in
the four old lodges, in the trust that they would never suffer
the old charges and ancient landmarks to be infringed.

The four old lodges then agreed to extend their patronage
to any lodge which should hereafter be constituted by the
Grand Lodge, according to the new regulations of the
society ; and that the Masters and Wardens of such new
lodges should be permitted to share with them all the privi-
leges of the Grand Lodge, except precedence of rank.

For a time, the brethren of the four old lodges considered
their attendance at Grand Lodge unnecessary, and trusted
implicitly to their Masters and Wardens, but soon fearing
that in process of time the representatives of the new lodges
would so far outnumber the old ones, as to have it in their
power to encroach on, or even subvert, the privileges of the
original masons of England, which had been centered in the
four old lodges, with the concurrence of the brethren at
large, they wisely framed a code of laws for the future
government of the society, to which was annexed a con-
ditional clause, which the Grand Master for the time being,
his successors, and the master of every lodge to be hereafter
constituted, were bound to preserve inviolate, in all time
coming."* This conditional clause reads thus :

" Every annual Grand Lodge has an inherent power and
authority to make new regulations, or to alter these, for the
real benefit of this ancient fraternity ; provided always, that the
old landmarks be carefully preserved ; and that such alter-
ations and new regulations be proposed and agreed to, at the

* Vide charges at the installation of the Master of a lodge.

GRAND LODGES. 13

third quarterly communication preceding the annual grand
feast , and that they be offered also to the perusal of all the
brethren, before dinner, in writing, even of the youngest ap~
prentice ; the approbation and consent of the majority of all
the brethren present, being absolutely necessary to make the
same binding and obligatory."

This regulation has since become obsolete, and the annual
assembly of masons has long ceased to be held.

During the years preceding, and subsequent to the forma-
tion of the Grand Lodge of England, as above described, the
general assembly, or Grand Lodge, at York, continued regu-
larly to meet, as heretofore.

For a series of years, the most perfect harmony subsisted
between the two Grand Lodges, and private lodges flourished
in both parts of the kingdom, under their separate jurisdic-
tion. The Grand Lodge at London took the title of " Tlie
Grand Lodge of England," while that at York was known as
" The Grand Lodge of all England." The former, on account
of its situation, being encouraged by some of the principal
nobility, soon acquired consequence and reputation ; while
the latter, restricted to fewer members, gradually declined,
and at last ceased to exist.*

During a large portion of the time subsequent to the first
general assembly at York, in England, Freemasonry was also
flourishing in Scotland. Although much uncertainty hangs
around the early history of its introduction into Scotland, it
is generally conceded to have been as early as the twelfth
century, when the abbeys of Melrose, Kelso, and Kilwinning,
were constructed, and foreign freemasons were sent for.
Still later, assemblies for the general government of the craft,
were frequently held at Kilwinning.

In the reign of James I., every Grand Master who was
chosen by the brethren, either from the nobility or clergy,
and approved of by the crown, was entitled to an annual

* A note to the tenth edition of Preston, page 281, says : " There is at present
(1795), a Grand Lodge of Masons in the city of York, who trace their existence
from this period, (926).'

14 GRAND LODGES.

revenue of four pounds Scots, from each master mason, and
likewise to a fee, at the initiation of every new member. He
was empowered to adjust any differences that might arise
among the brethren, to regulate those affairs connected with
the fraternity, which it was improper to bring under the cog-
nizance of the courts of law, and to appoint deputies, or War-
dens, who resided in the chief towns of Scotland, and man-
aged the concerns of the order, when it was inconvenient to
appeal to the Grand Master himself.

In the reign of James II., the office of Grand Master of
Scotland was granted to William St. Clair, Earl of Orkney
and Caithness, and Baron of Roslin, " his heirs and succes-
sors," by the king's charter.*

In Hays' MS., in the Advocate's library,! there are two
charters granted by the Scottish masons, appointing the St.
Clairs of Roslin their hereditary Grand Masters. The first is
without date, but signed by several masons who appoint
William St. Clair of Roslin, his heirs and successors, their
patrons and judges. The other is, in some measure, a ratifi-
cation of the first, and is dated 1630, in which they appoint
Sir William St. Clair, of Roslin, his heirs and successors, to
be their "patrons, protectors, and overseers, in all time
coming."

In 1736, William Sinclair; Esq., the last of the Sinclairs of
Roslin, and without issue, renounced not only the right to
the office which he derived from the brethren, but any right
also which, as a descendant of the Earl of Caithness, he
might claim from the grants of the Scottish monarchs. Hav-
ing announced his intention at a meeting of the Edinburgh
and neighboring lodges, called by him for the purpose, circu-
lar letters were dispatched to all the lodges in Scotland, invit-
ing them to appear, either by themselves or proxies, on next
St. Andrew's day, to concur and assist in the election of a
Grand Master. When that day arrived, thirty-two lodges
appeared, by themselves or proxies, and after receiving the
deed of resignation from William Sinclair, Esq., proceeded

* Lawrie. f Lawrie, 62

GRAND LODGES — MODE OF ORGANIZING. 15

to the election of another Grand Master, when, on account
of the zeal which he had always shown for the honor and
prosperity of the order, the same William Sinclair, Esq., was
unanimously elected to that office, and proclaimed " Grand
Master Mason of all Scotland."* Thus was the present Grand
Lodge of Scotland instituted in 1736.

From the Grand Lodge of England, or the Grand Lodge of
Scotland, all other existing Grand Lodges have directly or
indirectly derived their origin — most of them from the
former.

The date of the organization of the principal Grand
Lodges in Europe and America, is as follows :

England, 1717 ; Ireland, 1730 ; Scotland, 1736 ; France,
1756 ; Germany, 1741 ; Prussia, 1740 ; Saxony, 1812 ; Hol-
land, 1757 ; Denmark, 1743 ; Sweden, 1754; Poland, 1784 ;
Switzerland, 1764 ; Alabama, 1821 ; Arkansas, 1832 ; Cal-
ifornia, 1850 ; Connecticut, 1789 ; Canada, 1855 ; Delaware,
1806 ; District of Columbia, 1800 ; Florida, 1830 ; Georgia,
1786; Illinois, 1840 ; Indiana, 1818 ; Iowa, 1844; Kansas,
1856; Kentucky, 1800 ; Louisiana, 1812 ; Maine, 1820; Mas-
sachusetts, 1733 ; Maryland, 1787 ; Michigan, 1826 ; Minne-
sota, 1853 ; Mississippi, 1818 ; Missouri, 1821 ; Nebraska,
1857 ; New Hampshire, 1789 ; New Jersey, 1786 ; New
York, 1781 ; North Carolina, 1771 ; Ohio, 1808 ; Oregon, 1851 ;
Pennsylvania, 1764 ; Rhode Island, 1791 ; South Carolina,
1787; Tennessee, 1794; Texas, 1837; Vermont, 1794 ; Vir-
ginia, 1777 ; Wisconsin, 1843.

Mode of Organizing.

The usual mode of organizing a new Grand Lodge, is, in
substance, as follows :

A certain number of lodges, not less than three, holding
charters or warrants from some legal Grand Lodge, or from
different Grand Lodges, meet in convention, by their repre-
sentatives, formally resolve to organize a Grand Lodge, adopt
a constitution, and proceed to elect and install their officers.

• Lawrie, p 64.

16 . GRAND LODGES — STYLE AND TITLE.

It is necessary that it be a separate state, or territory ;
that there be no Grand Lodge at that time existing within it ;
that at least three chartered lodges be, at the time, in active
existence within the territorial limits, and consent to the for-
mation of such Grand Lodge ; that they meet in convention
as lodges, and not as individuals ; that they adopt a constitu-
tion ; and that the newly elected Grand Master be installed
by some Past Grand Master, or by the senior Past Master
present.

It is not essential that it should be an independent and
sovereign state or territory, but simply necessary that it be
a separate and distinct state or territory.*

The lodges must surrender their old warrants, and take out
new ones from the Grand Lodge thus constituted.

If there be more than three lodges previously existing in
the territory, we are of opinion, though we do not know that
the point has ever been raised, that the consent of a majority
of all of them is necessary to the legality of the new Grand
Lodge. Such a rule would seem at least to be just and rea-
sonable.

Style and Title.
Maine. — The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Ancient
Free and Accepted Masons of the State of Maine.

New Hampshire. — The Grand Lodge of the Ancient and
Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons of the
State of New Hampshire.

Vermont. — The Grand Lodge of the Most Ancient and
Honorable Society of Free and Accepted Masons for the
State of Vermont.

Massachusetts. — The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of
Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts.

Khode Island. — The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of

* This is now well settled ; and legal Grand Lodges have been formed in
Oregon, Minnesota, Kansas, Nebraska, and other territories, and in "the provinca
of Canada.

GRAND LODGES — STYLE AND TITLE. 17

Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of the State of JRhode
Island and Providence Plantations.

Connecticut. — The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of the
State of Connecticut.

New York. — The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of the
Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted
Masons of the State of New York.

New Jersey. — The Grand Lodge of the Most Ancient and
Honorable Society of Free and Accepted Masons for the State
of New Jersey.

Pennsylvania. — The Grand Lodge of the Most Ancient and
Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons of Penn-
sylvania and Masonic jurisdiction thereunto belonging.

Delaware. — The Grand Lodge of Delaware.

Maryland. — The Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted
Masons of Maryland.

District of Columbia. — The Grand Lodge of Free and
Accepted Masons of the District of Columbia.

Virginia. — The Grand Lodge of Virginia.

North Carolina. — The Grand Lodge of Ancient York
Masons of North Carolina.

South Carolina. — The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of
Ancient Freemasons of South Carolina.

Georgia. — The Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons
of the State of Georgia.

Florida. — The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Free and
Accepted Masons of the State of Florida.

Alabama. — The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Ancient
Free and Accepted Masons of Alabama and its Masonic juris-
diction.

Mississippi. — The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of th©
State of Mississippi.

Louisiana. — The Grand Lodge of the State of Louisiana.

Texas. — The Grand Lodge of Texas.

18 GRANL lodged— style and title.

Arkansas. — The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of the
Most Ancient and Honorable Fraternity o^ Free and Accepted
Masons of the State of Arkansas.

Tennessee. — The Grand Lodge of the State of Ten-
nessee.

Kentucky. — The Grand Lodge of Kentucky.

Ohio. — The Grand Lodge of the Most Ancient and Honor
able Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons of the State of
Ohio.

Michigan. — The Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted
Masons of the State of Michigan.

Indiana. — The Grand Lodge of the Ancient and Honorable
Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons of the State of
Indiana.

Illinois. — The Grand Lodge of Illinois of Ancient Free and
Accepted Masons.

Missouri.— The Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted
Ancient Masons of the State of Missouri.

Iowa. — The Grand Lodge of Iowa of Ancient Free and
Accepted Masons.

Wisconsin. — The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Ancient
Free and Accepted Masons of Wisconsin.

Minnesota. — The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of
Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of Minnesota.

Kansas.— The Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted
Masons of Kansas.

Nebraska.— The Grand Lodge of Nebraska.

California.— The Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted
Masons of the State of California.

Oregon.— The Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted
Masons of the Territory of Oregon.

Canada— The Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted
Masons of Canada.

GRAND LODGES MEMBERS. 19

England. — The United Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and
Accepted Masons of England.

Ireland. — The Grand Masonic Lodge of Ireland.

Scotland. — The Grand Lodge of the Ancient and Honora-
ble Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons of Scotland.

Members.

An American Grand Lodge is usually composed of its offi-
cers— elect and appointed, except the Grand Tiler — its Past
Grand Masters, Deputy Grand Masters, and Grand Wardens ;
and the Masters and Wardens of its subordinate lodges, or
their regularly appointed proxies.

The Grand Lodges of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont,
New Jersey, Arkansas, Texas, Virginia, and Mississippi,
have, in addition to the above, what are called District
Deputy Grand Masters, who are admitted to a seat and vote
in the Grand Lodge. In New Hampshire all Past District D.
G. Masters, are also considered members of the Grand
Lodge

The Grand Lodges of England, Ireland, Rhode Island, Ver-
mont, Texas, Iowa, New Jersey, District of Columbia, Florida,
Georgia, Arkansas, California, Virginia, Maryland, Mississippi,
and Kansas, admit all Past Masters of their subordinate
lodges to a seat and vote in Grand Lodge.

In Alabama, and Louisiana, Past Masters are allowed a
seat in Grand Lodge, but not a vote.

In Indiana, Kentucky, and Georgia, the Wardens of subor-
dinate lodges are not admitted to membership in Grand
Lodge.

In New Hampshire and Florida, one representative from
each subordinate lodge is admitted to seat and vote in Grand
Lodgn, in addition to the Master and Wardens.

20 GKAND LODGES — OFFICERS — TITLES.

, Officers.

The usual officers of American Grand Lodges, are

1. Grand Master.

2. Deputy Grand Master.

3. Grand Senior Warden.

4. Grand Junior Warden.

5. Grand Treasurer.

6. Grand Secretary.

7. Grand Chaplain, or Chaplains.

8. Grand Marshal.

9. Grand Senior Deacon.

10. Grand Junior Deacon.

11. Grand Stewards.

12. Grand Sword Bearer.

13. Grand Standard Bearer.

14. Grand Pursuivants.

15. Grand Lecturer, or Lecturers.

16. Grand Orator.

17. Grand Tiler.

The Grand Lodge of England omits Nos. 8, 13, 15, 16, and
has, in addition to the above, a Pro Grand Master ; Pro-
vincial Grand Masters ; Grand Registrar ; Grand Superintend-
ent of Works ; Grand Director of the Ceremonies ; Grand
Assistant, and Organist.

The officers of the Grand Lodge of Scotland are, a Grand
Master, Past Grand Master, Grand Master Depute, Substitute
Grand Master, Senior and Junior Grand Wardens, Grand
Treasurer, Grand Secretary, Grand Clerk, two Grand Chap-
lains, Senior and Junior Grand Deacons, Architect to the
Grand Lodge, Grand Jeweler, Grand Bible-bearer, Grand
Director of Ceremonies, Grand Bard, Grand Sword-bearer,
Grand Director of Music, two Grand Marshals, and out-door
and in-door Grand Tilers.

Titles.

The title of a Grand Master, or Past Grand Master, is
"Most Worshipful;" that of Deputy or Past Deputy Grand
Master, Grand Wardens, or Past Grand Wardens, Grand

3RAND LODGES — rOWEltS OP OFFICERS — WHO CAN INSTALL. 21

Treasurer, Grand Secretary, District Deputy Grand Master,
or Past ditto, is " Right Worshipful ;" that of all other officers
of the Grand Lodge, (except the Tiler) is " Worshipful." The
well settled title of the Master of a subordinate lodge, is
*' Worshipful." All other officers, as well as the members of
a subordinate lodge, are addressed simply as " Brother" The
above is the general, and almost universal American usage.

Powers of Officers.
With the exception of the Grand Master, who possesses
certain powers, prerogatives, and privileges, by immemorial
right, the several officers of a Grand Lodge possess no pow-
ers, ex officio, but such as are expressly granted to them by
their respective Grand Lodge constitutions. All other pow-
ers, prerogatives and privileges, are withheld from them';
except it be such as belong to them by virtue of their mem-
bership in the fraternity, or in some particular lodge.

"Who can Install Grand Lodge Officers.

The general rule is, that the Grand Master can only be in-
stalled by a Present or Past Grand Master ; or, if none be
present, by the Senior Grand officer present, (he being also a
Past Master) and in the absence of all such, by the Senior
Past Master present. The Grand Master, when installed, has
the right to install his subordinate officers.

The Grand Master shall be installed by his immediate pre-
decessor, or, in his absence, by the Senior Past Grand Master
present ; and in the absence of such Past Grand Master, b>
the Senior Past Master present ; preference, however, bein^
given to Past Grand officers, according to rank. — Const. Me.

It will be competent for your Past Master, or other
Past Master, at your option, and in the absence of all the
Grand officers, to install your officers. — Hubbard, G. M. Ohio,
1851.

The Gran(. Master shall be installed by his immediate pre-
decessor, or such Past Grand Master as Lhe Grand Lodge ma_)
designate for that purpose ; or, when it is not a new choice,
by the Senior Past Grand Master present After the installa-

22 GRAND LODGES — GENERAL POWERS.

tion of the Grand Master, he shall install the other officers of
the Grand Lodge. — Const. N. H.

In Massachusetts, the rule is the same as in Maine, except
the last clause as quoted above, which is omitted.

The Grand Master is to be installed by the last preceding
Grand Master present. — Const. Venn.

The Grand Master shall be installed by a Past Grand Mas-
ter, a Past Deputy Grand Master, or Senior Past Master,
present. — Consts. B. C. ; Mo.

It is the duty of the Grand Master to install his successor
in office, who shall then proceed to install the other Grand
officers, if present. — Const. Ind.

The Grand Master shall be installed by his immediate pre-
decessor; or, in his absence, by the Senior Past Grand
Master present ; and in the absence of such, by the Senior
Past Master present. — Const. Wis.

It is the duty of the Grand Master to install his deputy, but
he may deputize whom he pleases to install all the other
officers, and also any officer of a private lodge. — Const. Ky.

No person can legally install a Grand Master elect, save one
who holds, or has held, a similar office. — Daniel, C. F. C,
Miss., 1858.

General Powers.
A Grand Lodge is the supreme masonic authority within
its jurisdiction. Its powers are three-fold — legislative, judi-
cial, and executive. In its legislative capacity, it has the
power of enacting laws and regulations for the government
of the craft, and of altering, repealing, and abrogating them.
In its judicial capacity, it has the power of investigating,
regulating, and deciding all matters relative to the craft, or
to particular lodges, or to individual masons, which it may
exercise, either of itself, or by such* delegated authority as it
may appoint. In its executive capacity, it has the power of
erasing lodges, and expelling brethren from the craft. These
powers are subject to one limitation, which is that contained
in the regulators of 1721, and expressed in the following
concise language : * provided always that the old land-

GRAND LODGES — CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS. 23

*arks be carefully preseryed." By this standard, and this
only, are we to measure the powers of a Grand Lodge.

Constitutional Powers.

Under this head w7e give a carefully prepared summary of
the powers claimed by the several American Grand Lodges
as set forth in their respective constitutions.

Maine. — This Grand Lodge claims power to enact and
enforce laws and regulations for the government of the frater-
nity, and to alter, amend, and repeal the same, at pleasure ;
to constitute new lodges, by granting dispensations and
charters under seal, and, for good cause, to suspend, revoke,
and annul the same, at pleasure ; to establish and preserve
a uniform mode of working and lectures, under the sanction
of the ancient landmarks and customs of masonry ; to assess
and collect from the several lodges under its jurisdiction, such
sums of money as may be deemed necessary for the benefit
of the craft ; to hear and determine all questions of dispute
between two or more- lodges ; to hear and decide all cases
of appeal from the decision of subordinate lodges ; to
demand and receive such fees and charges for granting dis-
pensations, charters, certificates, and diplomas, as may be
reasonable ; to hear and decide all charges and complaints
against any officer of the Grand Lodge, and to inflict such
punishment on the delinquent and guilty, as may appear just
and proper ; to exercise all such powers, and perform all
such acts, as, by custom, are exercised and performed by
Grand Lodges, within the ancient constitutions and landmarks
of Freemasonry. — Const. 1849.

New Hampshire. — This Grand Lodge claims power to
ordain and establish laws, rules, and regulations, for the gov-
ernment and benefit of the craft within the state ; to grant
charters, and constitute new lodges, and to revoke and annul
the same ; and to prescribe and require an uniform mode of
working, but in no case to alter, deface, or remove the ancient
and established landmarks of Masonry. — Const. 1851.

Vermont. — This Grand Lodge claims power to constitute
new lodges ; to establish an uniform mode of working

24 GRAND LODGES — CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS.

throughout the state,(strictly adhering to the ancient landmarks,
usages, and customs of masonry, which are, on no account, to
be removed or defaced ;) to require of the lodges under its
jurisdiction, from time to time, such sums of money as it shall
think necessary, to be appropriated for the benefit of the
craft ; to make general regulations, and by-laws ; to hear and
determine ail appeals ; to decide all disputes between the dif-
ferent lodges under its jurisdiction ; to hear and entertain all
petitions for charity, and all other petitions upon all other
subjects, legislative or otherwise, which shall not conflict with
the ancient constitutions of the order ; and all other power
necessary and proper to an independent Grand Lodge. —
Const. 1852.

Massachusetts. — This Grand Lodge claims power to enact
laws and regulations for the government of the craft, and to
alter, repeal, and abrogate them ; to establish and preserve a
uniform system of work and lectures ; to issue dispensations
and charters for new lodges, and to suspend or revoke the
same, for unmasonic conduct, the non-observance of the regu-
lations of the Grand Lodge, the non-payment of dues, or other
neglect of duty ; to investigate, regulate, and decide, all mat-
ters relative to the craft, or to particular lodges, or to indi-
vidual brothers, which power it may exercise either in itself,
or by such delegated authority as it may appoint ; but in the
Grand Lodge alone resides the power of revoking the
charters of lodges, expelling brethren from the craft, and the
power of finally deciding on every case which concerns the
interests of the craft. — Const. 1843.

Rhode Island. — This Grand Lodge claims power to enact
and enforce all laws and regulations for the government of
the fraternity, and to alter, amend, and repeal the same, at
pleasure ; to constitute new lodges, by granting dispensations
and charters, under seal, and, for good cause, to suspend,
revoke, and annul the same, at pleasure ; to establish and
preserve a uniform mode of work and lectures, under the
sanction of the ancient landmarks and customs of masonry ;
to tear and determine all questions of dispute between two

GRAND LODGES CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS. 25

or more lodges ; to hear and decide all cases of appeal from
the decision of subordinate lodges ; to demand and receive
such fees and charges for granting dispensations, charters,
certificates, and diplomas, as may be reasonable ; to hear and
decide all charges and complaints against any officer of the
Grand Lodge, and to inflict such punishment on the delin-
quent and guilty, as may appear just and proper ; to decide
with what subordinate lodge they will celebrate the anni-
versary of St. John the Baptist ; to exercise all such powers,
and perform all such acts, as by custom are exercised and
performed by Grand Lodges, within the ancient constitutions
and landmarks of Freemasonry. — Const. 1858.

Connecticut. — This Grand Lodge claims power to consti-
tute new lodges ; to establish a uniform mode of working in
all the lodges in the state : to make such by-laws for its own
government as it shall think proper ; to demand such fees for
charters and dispensations, as shall be established by its by-
laws ; and to superintend the general police of masonry,
according to the ancient usages of masons, carefully regard-
ing the old landmarks, which are, on no account, to be
removed or defaced. — Const. 1855.

New York. — This Grand Lodge claims power to govern
and superintend the fraternity, within its territorial jurisdic-
tion ; to enlarge or diminish the number and qualifications of
its members, at its pleasure, by a provision or change of its
constitution ; to frame and adopt, at its own convenience,
particular constitutions and regulations, and to alter, amend,
add to, or repeal the same, at pleasure, under the limitations
therein imposed : legislative power, in every case of legisla-
tion, not delegated or reserved to subordinate lodges ; original
judicial powers, embracing all matters of controversy which
may arise between any subordinate lodges under its jurisdic-
tion, or the members of different lodges, and the enforcement
of discipline upon its own members, and the lodges under its
jurisdiction, and upon individual masons ; appellate powers,
embracing all matters of controversy and discipline proper
for masonic investigation, arising in any subordinate lodge,
2

26 GRAND LODGES — CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS.

and over which it has not original jurisdiction ; but nothing
can be adopted in derogation of the ancient landmarks. —
Const. 1854.

New Jersey. — This Grand Lodge claims power to consti-
tute new lodges ; to establish a uniform mode of working
throughout the state, strictly adhering to the ancient land-
marks, usages, and customs of Masonry, which are, on no
account, to be removed or defaced ; to require from the
several lodges under its jurisdiction, such annual dues as it
shall think necessary to be appropriated for the benefit of the
craft ; to hear and determine all appeals, and decide all dis-
putes between the different lodges under its jurisdiction ; to
demand such fees as it may think just and reasonable, upon
granting a charter incorporating a new lodge ; to make all
by-laws, rules, and regulations, necessary and proper for car-
rying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other pow-
ers necessary and proper to an independent Grand Lodge,
not inconsistent with its constitution. — Const. 1818.

Pennsylvania. — This Grand Lodge claims power to estab-
lish new lodges, by its warrant ; to enact laws and regula-
tions for the government of the craft ; to alter and repeal
such laws and regulations, preserving the ancient landmarks
of the order, and to investigate and determine all masonic
matters relating to the craft in general, to particular lodges,
or to individual brethren, either directly, or by its delegated
authority. — Const. 1857.

Delaware. — This Grand Lodge claims power to superin-
tend and regulate the manner of working of all the lodges
under this jurisdiction, having due regard in all things to the
ancient usages and landmarks ; to charter new lodges ; and
to make rules and regulations, not inconsistent with the con-
stitution of the Grand Lodge, for its own government, and the
regulation of the subordinate lodges, according to ancient
masonic usages.; — Const. 1826.

Maryland. — This Grand Lodge claims power to receive
appeals, redress grievances, and remove all complaints of the

GRAND LODGES — CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS. 27

several lodges ; to reprehend malconduct, in any of the
lodges, or officers or members of lodges, under its jurisdic-
tion ; to grant warrants ; to relieve distressed brethren, their
widows or children ; to assess, from time to time, such con-
tributions for charity, and other purposes, as may appear for
the benefit of the craft ; and to do all other acts required by
the act of incorporation, or by this constitution ; and all such
things as appertain to it by the ancient constitutions and
regulations of the craft, and are best calculated to ensure the
attainment of the benevolent objects of Masonry.— Const,
1845.

District of Columbia. — This Grand Lodge claims power
to hear and determine all appeals from subordinate lodges,
and all questions of dispute between two or more lodges ; to
hear and decide all charges and complaints against any officer
of the Grand Lodge, or the Master of a subordinate lodge ; to
grant charters for new lodges, and demand and receive there-
for, and for dispensations, certificates, and diplomas, such fees
as may be reasonable ; to assess and collect from the several
subordinate lodges such sums of money as the good of the
craft may require ; to enact and enforce all laws and regula-
tions for the government of the fraternity, and to amend or
repeal the same at pleasure ; to establish and maintain a
uniform mode of work, under the sanction of the ancient land-
marks and customs of Masonry ; and to exercise, in short, all
such powers as belong to it by custom, or the ancient consti-
tutions and regulations of the craft, and are the best calcu
lated to insure the end and aim of the institution. — Const. 1850.

Virginia. — This Grand Lodge claims power and authority,
at all times, to make local ordinances and new regulations, as
wTell as to amend old ones, for their own particular benefit,
and the good of Masonry in general ; provided always, that
the ancient landmarks be carefully preserved. — Const. 1854.

North Carolina. — This Grand Lodge claims power to con-
stitute new lodges, by charter ; to establish a uniform mode of
working in all the lodges in this state ; to superintend and
regulate the general police of Masonry, according to the

28 GRAND LODGES — CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS.

ancient usages and customs of masons, (carefully regarding the
old landmarks, which, are, on no account, to be removed or
defaced ;) to legislate upon all matters of masonic government ;
to make all necessary regulations for its own government, and
that of its subordinates ; and to exercise all the original
essential powers, privileges, rights, and authority, appertain-
ing to the ancient craft. — Const. 1856.

South Carolina. — This Grand Lodge claims power to grant
its warrant of constitution for new lodges ; to make rules and
regulations for the government of the craft, within its juris-
diction ; and, in short, that all masonic power is derived from
the Grand Lodge. — Const. 1852.

Georgia. — This Grand Lodge claims power to enact and
establish new regulations for the government of the craft,
within its jurisdiction, and to alter, amend, explain, or repeal
the same, not contravening the ancient landmarks of the
order ; to establish and preserve the traditions, lectures,
work, and ceremonies of the order, and 'to exclude all innova-
tions, and unauthorized modifications of the same ; to author-
ize the formation and institution of such new lodges as may
be found necessary, and to alter, amend, repeal, or suspend,
the warrants of lodges now in existence, in such manner as
may be hereinafter pointed out ; to investigate, regulate, and
decide all matters pertaining to the craft at large, and to par-
ticular lodges, which it may exercise, either by itself, or by such
delegated authority as it may in its wisdom and discretion,
from time to time, appoint ; the sole power of extinguish-
ing lodges, or expelling brethren from the privileges of Free-
masonry, which shall not be delegated to any subordinate
authority ; and to exercise all such powers, discharge all such
duties, and perform all such acts, as have been performed by
Grand Lodges of Freemasons, in times past, within the ancient
customs of the fraternity. — Const. 1856.

Florida. — This Grand Lodge claims power to receive all
appeals, redress grievances, and remove complaints of the
subordinate lodges ; to grant warrants or charters, and

GRAND LODGES— CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS. 29

authorize new lodges ; to regulate the work, and reprehend
malconduct in any of its subordinate lodges. — Const. 1853.

Alabama. — This Grand Lodge claims original and exclusive
jurisdiction over all subjects of masonic legislation, and
appellate jurisdiction only from the decisions of the subor-
dinate lodges, and its enactments and decisions upon all ques-
tions shall be the supreme masonic law of the state. It
claims power to prescribe such rules and regulations for the
government of the subordinate lodges, as, in its judgment,
will conduce to the welfare, prosperity, and happiness of the
craft ; to grant dispensations and charters for the establish-
ment of new lodges, and to revoke and annul the same, for
such causes as it may deem sufficient ; to prescribe the man-
ner, and require a uniform mode of working, but, in no case,
to alter, remove, or displace, the ancient and established
landmarks of Masonry ; and to require from its subordinates,
such reasonable fees and dues as will, at all times, discharge
the engagements of the Grand Lodge. — Const. 1854.

Mississippi. — This Grand Lodge claims the superintendence
and care of all subordinate lodges under its jurisdiction, and
power to direct all their works and designs, and see that they
are executed agreeably to the laws, usages, and customs of
ancient Masonry ; power to hear appeals, redress grievances,
and remove complaints from subordinate lodges ; to relievo
distressed brethren, and their widows and orphans ; to issue
charters for new lodges ; to assess such contributions from
subordinate lodges, for charitable and other purposes, from
time to time, as it shall judge right and proper for the good
of Masonry ; and to divide the state into districts, and appoint
a District Deputy Grand Master for each district thereof, —
Const. 1858. /

Louisiana. — This Grand Lodge claims the exclusive right
to constitute and govern all lodges of symbolic Freemasonry
in the state of Louisiana ; to hear all appeals, decide in the
last resort between the lodges and the brethren ; redress all
grievances ; to try and punish its own officers, and the mas-
ters in office of its constituent lodges ; to make all laws and

30 GRAND LODGES — CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS.

regulations necessary for the government of the lodges and
brethren under its jurisdiction, and for the propagation and
advancement of the true principles and work of ancient Free-
masonry, not inconsistent with its constitution, " the old
charges of the Free and Accepted Masons of 1723," or the
ancient usages and landmarks of the order. — Const. 1851.

Texas. — This Grand Lodge claims power to make such
laws for its own government, as it may deem proper ; to con-
stitute new lodges, by charter, under seal ; to exercise
masonic jurisdiction throughout the state of Texas ; to estab-
lish a uniform mode of working in all the lodges within its
jurisdiction, and to superintend and regulate the general
affairs of Masonry, according to the ancient usages and cusr
toms of masons, carefully regarding the ancient landmarks,
which are, on no account, to be moved or defaced. — Consh
1848.

Kentucky. — This Grand Lodge claims power to receive
appeals, redress grievances, and remove all complaints of the
private lodges ; to grant warrants, and authorize new lodges
to work ; to reprehend malconduct, in any of its private
lodges or members ; and to assess such economical contribu-
tions for charity, and other exigencies, from time to time, as
shall appear proper for the good of the craft. — Const. 1853.

Tennessee. — This Grand Lodge claims the right and power
to make all such rules and regulations for the government of
the fraternity, as may be deemed necessary by a majority of
its members, provided the same shall not conflict with the
ancient constitutions and landmarks of Masonry ; to receive
and hear appeals, redress grievances, and remove complaints
of subordinate lodges ; grant charters to new lodges ; issue
warrants of dispensation ; reprove and punish the misconduct
of subordinate lodges, and do all things necessary for the
promotion of the honor and dignity of the- order, and the good
of the fraternity. — Const. 1856.

Ohio,— This Grand Lodge claims power to form a constitu-
tion, as the fundamental law of its action ; to enact such by-
laws, from time to time, as it may deem necessary for its own

GRAND LODGES — CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS. 31

government ; to make such rules, and prescribe such regula*
tions for the administration of its •subordinate lodges, as will
insure the prosperity thereof, and promote the general good
of Masonry ; to require from them such fees and dues as will
at all times discharge the engagements of the Grand Lodge ;
and original and exclusive jurisdiction over all subjects of
masonic legislation, and appellate jurisdiction from the
decisions of the subordinate lodges ; and that its enactments
and decisions upon all questions, shall be the supreme
masonic law of the state. — Const. 1844.

Michigan. — The constitution of this Grand Lodge does not
specifically define its powers, except full and complete appel-
late and corrective powers, in all cases relative to the frater-
nity, within the state of Michigan ; power to assess such con-
tributions, from time to time, as the welfare of the craft may
require ; to warrant and organize lodges within the state ; to
constitute, whenever it shall deem the same expedient, a
Grand Steward's Lodge of Charity ; and to elect a Grand
Visitor or Lecturer, and define his duties. — Const. 1857.

Indiana. — This Grand Lodge claims power to form a con-
stitution, as the fundamental law of its masonic action ; to
enact such by-laws, from time to time, as it may deem neces-
sary for its own government ; and to make such rules, and
prescribe such regulations, for the administration of its sub-
ordinate lodges, as will insure the prosperity thereof, and
promote the general good of Masonry ; supreme legislative
authority ; provided always, that the ancient landmarks of the
order be held inviolate ; and power and authority to require
of its subordinate lodges such dues and fees as will at all
times discharge the engagements of the Grand Lodge. — Const.
1855.

Illinois. — This Grand Lodge claims power to constitute
new lodges ; to establish a uniform mode of working through-
out the state, strictly adhering to the ancient landmarks,
usages, and customs of Masonry ; to hear and determine
all appeals from subordinate lodges, and to decide all disputes
between the same ; to demand such fees as may be deemed

32 GRAND LODGES — CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS.

just and reasonable, upon granting charters constituting new
lodges ; to make such by-laws as may be necessary for their
good government, and not inconsistent with its constitution ;
and to do all things heretofore accustomed to be done by
other Grand Lodges, which are within the ancient landmarks,
and usages of the craft. — Const. 1855.

Missouri. — This Grand Lodge claims to be the supreme
masonic authority within the state of Missouri, and by the
ancient constitutions and usages of the fraternity, invested
with all the original essential powers and privileges belong-
ing to the ancient craft, and to have power, especially, to
enact and enforce all laws and regulations for the government
of the fraternity ; and to alter, amend, and repeal the same, at
pleasure ; to constitute new lodges, by granting dispensations
and charters, under seal, and, for good cause, to suspend, re-
voke, or annul the same, at pleasure ; to establish and pre-
serve a uniform mode of work and lectures, within the
ancient landmarks and customs of Masonry ; to assess and
collect from the several lodges under its jurisdiction, such
sums of money as it may deem necessary to be appropriated
for the benefit of the craft ; to hear and determine all ques-
tions of dispute between two or more lodges ; to hear and
decide all appeals from the decision of subordinate lodges ;
to demand and receive such fees and charges, for granting
dispensations, charters, certificates, and diplomas, as may be
reasonable ; to require and collect from all brother masons
residing within its jurisdiction, such sums of money, annually,
for charitable purposes, as may, from time to time, be pro-
vided for, and required by law ; to hear and decide all
charges and complaints against any officer of the Grand
Lodge, and to inflict such punishment on the guilty, as may
appear just and proper ; and to exercise all such powers, and
perform all such acts, as by custom are exercised and per-
formed by Grand Lodges, within the ancient customs and
landmarks of the fraternity. — Const. 1858.

Iowa. — This Grand Lodge claims power to constitute new
lodges, by letters patent, under its seal; to establish a

GRAND LODGES — CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS. 33

uniform mode of working, throughout its jurisdiction, strictly
adhering to the ancient landmarks, usages, and customs of
Masonry ; to hear and determine all appeals from subordinate
lodges, and to decide all disputes between the different
lodges under its jurisdiction ; to demand such fees as may be
deemed just and reasonable, upon granting dispensations,
and constituting new lodges, and for other masonic pur-
poses ; to make such by-laws as may be necessary for their
good government, and not inconsistent with its constitution ;
and to do all things heretofore accustomed to be done by
other Grand Lodges, which are within the ancient landmarks
and usages of the craft. — Const. 1856.

Wisconsin. — This Grand Lodge claims to be the supreme
masonic authority in Wisconsin ; to be invested with power
to enact laws and regulations for the government of the craft,
and of altering, repealing, and abrogating them ; to preserve
a uniform system of work and lectures ; to issue dispensa-
tions and charters for new lodges, and to suspend and revoke
the same, for un-masonic conduct, non-observance of the
regulations of the Grand Lodge, non-payment of dues, or
other neglect of duty ; and the inherent power of investiga-
ting, regulating, and deciding all matters relative to the craft,
or to particular lodges, or to individual brothers ; which
power it may exercise either in itself, or by such delegated
authority, as, in its wisdom and discretion, it may appoint. —
Comt. 1856.

Minnesota. — rlnis Grand Lodge claims power to frame and
adopt particular constitutions, and general regulations, and
to amend, alter, add to, or repeal the same, at pleasure, under
the limitations therein imposed ; but nothing can be adopted
in derogation of the ancient landmarks ; legislative powers
extending to every case of legislation not delegated to subor-
dinate lodges ; original judicial powers, embracing all matters
of controversy which may arise between any of the subordi-
nate lodges under its jurisdiction, or the members of different
lodges, and the enforcement of discipline upon its own mem-
bers, and the lodges under its jurisdiction, and upon individ*
9*

34 GRAND LODGES — CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS.

ual masons ; appellate judicial powers, embracing all matters
of controversy and discipline, proper for masonic investiga-
tion, arising in any subordinate lodge, and over which it has
not original jurisdiction ; and all governmental powers, wheth-
er executive, legislative, or judicial, not expressly delegated
by the Grand Lodge, it claims as inherent in, and reserved
to it, as the supreme governing body. — Const. 1856.

Kansas. — This Grand Lodge claims all the original essen-
tial powers and privileges belonging to the ancient craft ; and,
especially, to make and enforce all laws and regulations foi
the government of* the fraternity, and to alter, amend, and
repeal the same at pleasure ; to constitute new lodges, by
dispensations and charters, and, for good cause, to suspend,
revoke, and annul the same, at pleasure ; to establish and
preserve a uniform mode of work and lectures, within the
ancient landmarks and customs of Masonry ; to assess and
collect from the several lodges under its jurisdiction, such
sums of money as may be deemed necessary to be appro-
priated to the benefit of the craft ; to hear and determine all
questions of dispute between two or more lodges ; to hear
and decide all appeals from the decisions of subordinate
lodges ; to demand and receive such fees and charges for
granting charters, dispensations, certificates, and diplomas,
as may be reasonable ; to require and collect from all masons
residing within its jurisdiction, such sums of money, annually,
for charitable purposes, as may, from time to time, be pro-
vided for, and required by law ; to hear and decide all
charges and complaints against any officer of the Grand
Lodge, and to inflict such punishment on the guilty, as may
appear just and proper ; and to exercise all such powers, and
perform all such acts, as by custom are exercised and per-
formed by Grand Lodges, within the ancient customs and
landmarks of the fraternity. — Const. 1856.

Nebraska. — This Grand Lodge claims power to form a con-
stitution, as the fundamental law of its masonic action ; to
enact by-laws for its own government ; to make rules, and
prescribe regulations for its subordinate lodges ; supreme

GRAND LODGES CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS. o5

legislative authority ; provided, always, that the ancient land-
marks of the order be held inviolate ; original and exclusive
jurisdiction over all subjects of masonic legislation, and
appellate jurisdiction from the decisions of the subordinate
lodges ; to require from its subordinates such dues and fees
as will, at all times, discharge the engagements of the Grand
Lodge ; and that its enactments and decisions shall be the
supreme masonic law of the territory, (or state.) — Const. 1857.

California. — This Grand Lodge claims original and exclu-
sive jurisdiction over all subjects of masonic legislation, and
appellate jurisdiction only from the decisions of the subordi-
nate lodges ; that its enactments and decisions upon all ques-
tions shall be the supreme masonic law of the state ; power
to prescribe such rules and regulations for the government
of the subordinate lodges, as wrill, in its judgment, conduce
to the welfare, prosperity, and happiness of the craft; to
grant dispensations and charters for the establishment of new
lodges, and to revoke and annul the same, for such causes as
it may deem sufficient ; to prescribe and require a uniform
mode of working, and to require from the subordinate lodges
such reasonable dues and fees as will, at all times, discharge
the engagements of the Grand Lodge. — Const. 1858.

Oregon. — This Grand Lodge claims power to grant charters
for new lodges, to be located within the limits of its jurisdic-
tion ; full and complete appellate and corrective powers, in
all cases, relative to the fraternity, within its jurisdiction ;
and power to assess upon its subordinate lodges such contri-
butions, from time to time, as the good of the craft may
require. — Const. 1851.

Canada. — This Grand Lodge claims the sole power of enac-
ting laws and regulations for the government of the craft,
and of altering, repealing, and abrogating them, always taking
care that the ancient landmarks of the order are preserved ;
the inherent power of investigating, regulating, and deciding
all matters relative to the craft, or to particular lodges, or to
individual brothers, which it may exercise either of itself, or
by such delegated authority as it may appoint j and sola

36 GRAND LODGES TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION.

power of erasing lodges, and expelling brethren from the
craft. — Const-. 1855.

England. — This Grand Lodge claims the inherent power
of enacting laws and regulations for the government of the
craft, and of altering, repealing, and abrogating them, always
taking care that the ancient landmarks of the order be pre-
served ; of investigating, regulating, and deciding all matters
relative to the craft, or to particular lodges, or to individual
brothers, which it may exercise either of itself, or by such
delegated authority, as, in its wisdom and discretion, it may
appoint; the sole power of erasing lodges, and expelling
brethren from the craft, a power which it does not delegate
to any subordinate authority in England. — Const. 1855.

Ireland. — This Grand Lodge claims, as the representative
of the whole order, an inherent right to make new regulations
for the benefit of the fraternity, and to alter those already
formed ; preserving, at the same time, the old landmarks of
the order ; the power of hearing and determining any cases
which it may deem expedient, concerning the fraternity in
general, particular lodges, or individual brethren ; also the
decision of all differences between brethren of the order,
which cannot be accommodated privately, or by a particular
lodge or lodges ; and the power to constitute new lodges, by
its warrant of constitution. — Const. 1855.

Scotland. — This Grand Lodge claims the power to consti-
tute new lodges, by charter, and to prescribe fees for the
same ; to hear and determine disputes between subordinate
lodges, or members of the craft, and its decisions shall be
final ; to frame by-laws for its own government ; to suspend
the charters of subordinate lodges, for cause ; and sole power
to grant diplomas, and prescribe the rules and fees for the
same. — Const. 1855.

Territorial Jurisdiction.
There is no written law of universal binding force on this
subject, either in America or Europe. We must, therefore
look for authority to the established practice — the commou
law of Masonry.

CRAND LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION. 3t

Prior to 1783, this whole continent was open to every
Grand Lodge in existence. In that year, the Grand Lodge of
Massachusetts declared itself " free and independent of any
other Grand Lodge or Grand Master in the universe," and
defined its power and authority as extending throughout the
commonwealth of Massachusetts, and to any of the United
States where no other Grand Lodge is erected, over such
lodges only as itself had or should establish ; and declared
that no person or persons ought or can use or exercise the
powers or the prerogatives of Grand Master or Grand Lodge,
" within any part of the commonwealth of Massachusetts, the
rightful and appropriate limits to which the authority of this
Grand Lodge forever hereafter extends."

This was the first American Grand Lodge to declare its
independence, and define its jurisdiction. The others soon
followed. The policy thus inaugurated, is the present and
well settled policy of the Grand Lodges of the Union, and in
which the Grand Lodges of Europe have, with the single
exception of Hamburg, concurred.

Each Grand Lodge has sole and exclusive masonic juris-
diction throughout the limits of the state or territory within
which it is regularly established. There can be but one legal
Grand Lodge in any state or territory. In any state, territory,
or country, where there is no legal Grand Lodge, each and every
Grand Lodge has power and authority to constitute lodges,
and hold jurisdiction over the same, until a Grand Lodge is
regularly organized in such state, territory, or country.

A Grand Lodge cannot be organized in any state or terri-
tory, until such state or territory has been regularly organized
and acknowledged by competent authority.

Such being the well settled law upon the subject, we have
not deemed it necessary, or important, to introduce further
authorities in support of it.

Penal Jurisdiction.
A Grand Lodge has full and complete jurisdiction over all
its officers and members, with the exception of its Grand
Master, as such, for unmasonic conduct, and may, by itself 01

38 GRAND LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION.

its duly authorized proxy, try, and suspend or expel them, at
its discretion.

Over the Grand Master. — The jurisdiction of a Grand
Lodge over its Grand Master, for official or other misconduct,
is not yet fully settled and defined ; though we are unable to
see why it has not, or should not have, such jurisdiction.
The old regulations of 1720, expressly acknowledge such
jurisdiction, and we have been unable to find any record of
its surrender or loss. If, then, such power did once exist,
or reside in the Grand Lodge, and it has not been surren-
dered (if it were possible to surrender it, which is, at least,
doubtful) or lost, it must now exist, and may be exercised by
any Grand Lodge, whenever it may deem it necessary.

If the Grand Master should abuse his power, and render
himself unworthy of the obedience and subjection of the
lodges, he shall be treated in a way and manner to be agreed
upon in a new regulation ; because hitherto the ancient fra-
ternity have had no occasion for it, their former Grand Mas-
ters having all behaved themselves worthy of that honorable
office. — General Regulations, 1721, XIX.

If the Grand Master should abuse his power, and render
himself unworthy of the obedience of the lodges, he shall be
subjected to some new regulation, to be dictated by the
occasion. — Const England — Const. Ca. This embodies the
true principle. — C. W. Moore, 1852.

It is the sense of this Grand Lodge, that the Grand Master
is but the creature of the Grand Lodge, with no implied
powers, inherent or divine ; and that it is competent for a
Grand Lodge to try her Grand Master, for a misdemeanor in
office, and deal with him as the nature of the offense may
require ; which action will comprehend what is understood
by a " new regulation." — Res. Cal., 1853.

It shall be competent for the subordinate lodge of which
the Grand Master is a member, to try, and expel or suspend
him, for any unmasonic conduct not growing out of his official
duties ; and when expelled or suspended, his office of Grand

GRAND LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION. 39

Master shall be vacated, and the officer next in rank shall fill
the office. — Reg. Lid., 1858. The regulation is dangerous as
a precedent, and should be repealed at once. — C. W. Moore,
1859.

We are aware that the opinion that a Grand Lodge has
authority to try its Grand Master, is disputed by many en-
lightened masons of the United States, among whom we may
name the Grand Secretaries of Mississippi (Mellex) and
South Carolina (Mackey) ; but the authority is so clearly
given in the nineteenth of the old regulations, in directing that
the Grand Master " shall be treated in a way and manner to
be agreed upon in a new regulation," that we could not
hesitate to give it our indorsement. — King, C. F. C. of N. Y.,
1854.

The Grand Lodge of Alabama, in 1850, expelled its Grand
Master, for an offense against the civil law. — G. W. C.

The Grand Master is as responsible to the laws of the
body over which he presides, as the humblest brother. —
C. W. Moore, 1852— Jordan, C. F. C. of N. C, 1854.

The present organization of many Grand Lodges, renders it
almost impracticable to make such a new regulation* — it can
be made in no other way — in which case the Grand Master
must remain exempt from other punishment for his misdeeds,
than that which arises from his own conscience, and the loss
of his brethren's regard and esteem. — Mackey.

The Grand Lodge of New York, in 1854, passed a resolu-
tion, declaring that it ought not to exercise original jurisdic-
tion to try a member of a subordinate lodge, for any masonic
offenses^ other than offenses against the Grand Lodge, when
such member is subject to trial by the subordinate lodge to
which he belongs. We think the decision a wise one. —
G. W. C.

The Grand Lodge of Arkansas, in 1855, refused to adopt a
resolution making a new regulation for the trial of a Grand
Master by three Past Grand Masters.

* In tlio manner prescribed in General Regulations, 1721, Art. XXYTX.

40 GRAND LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION.

There is no inherent right in a Grand Lodge to prefer or
inquire into charges of official misconduct against a Grand
Master, after his installation, during the term for which he
has been elected, nor to pronounce any censure or decision
against him. And to do so, by a new regulation, or other-
wise, is a violation of the ancient landmarks of our order. —
Ark., 1852.

Over Grand Officers and Members of Grand Lodge. —
A Grand Lodge has full and original jurisdiction over its own
officers and members, for misconduct, as such. It must be an
offense growing out of their office or membership in the
Grand Lodge, otherwise the latter has not jurisdiction ; they
being, in our opinion, amenable only to their subordinate
lodge for all other offenses. This rule applies to all the offi-
cers and members of Grand Lodge, except the Masters of sub-
ordinate lodges, who are amenable to the Grand Lodge alone,
which latter has, therefore, original and entire jurisdiction
over them. (See succeeding section.) The Grand Lodge
shall have power to try and punish its own members for any
offense ; and the rules herein prescribed for the government
of subordinate lodges, in the trial of offenses, shall govern the
Grand Lodge in like cases, so far as the same may be appli-
cable.— Const. Maine.

If any officer of the Grand Lodge shall be placed under
censure, or suspended for unmasonic conduct, by the secular
lodge to which he belongs, and no appeal to the Grand Lodge
is taken by him, he shall be incapacitated to exercise any
duties pertaining to such Grand Lodge office, until such cen-
sure be removed, or such suspension be terminated by the
action of such secular lodge. And if any such Grand officei
be expelled by his lodge, and takes no appeal from such
decree of expulsion to the Grand Lodge, such expulsion shall
operate as a termination of his Grand Lodge office, and the
office which he held in the Grand Lodge shall be treated as
vacant, until another officer shall be chosen to fill it by the
Grand Lodge. — Const. Vt.

Every charge brought before the Grand Lodge against an^

GRAND LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION. 41

member thereof, shall be made in writing, and the member so
charged shall be furnished with a copy thereof by the Grand
Secretary ; and any brother suspended or expelled there-
from, shall be entirely excluded from all the benefits and
privileges of Masonry, while under such sentence. — Const.
Alabama.

The constitution of Missouri provides, that charges against
any member of the Grand Lodge, growing out of his official
conduct, must be presented to the Grand or District Deputy
Grand Master, who may forthwith suspend him, and cite him
to appear before the Grand Lodge ; provided, always, that for
immoral or other unmasonic conduct, he shaU be amenable
to the lodge of which he is a member, or in whoserjurisdic-
tion he may reside.

That of Kansas is the same as above, except that the word
" District" is omitted.

Over the Master of a Subordinate Lodge. — A subordinate
lodge has not power to try its Master for any offense, how-
ever heinous, during his term of office. He is amenable to
the Grand Lodge alone, which has full and original jurisdic-
tion over him for unmasonic conduct. This is the well-
settled rule, and admits of no exceptions.

It shall not be competent for a lodge to try its Master.
Any five members of the lodge, or the District Deputy Grand
Master, may, however, impeach him before the Grand Master,
who shall order an investigation of the charges ; and if, in his
opinion, they are well founded, and of a character to justify
the proceeding, he may suspend the delinquent, and summon
him to appear at the ensuing meeting of the Grand Lodge, to
show cause why he should not be dealt with according to
the regulations and usages in such cases established. — Consts.
Mass., Maine, Wis. and Miss.

Every mason must be tried by his peers. Hence, the Mas-
ter cannot be tried by his lodge. — Const. Minn. — Const. N. Y.

Neither can a lodge try its Master ; but any three mem-
bers, after giving due notice, may, in case of a willful neglect

42 GRAND LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION.

of duty on his part, or for gross unmasonic conduct, prefer
charges against him before the Grand Lodge, whose action
shall be abided; or, the Grand Master, during recess, has
power to suspend. — Const. N. C.

If a Master shall be charged with the offenses specified
above* by a majority of a lodge over which he presides, or
by the Master of any other lodge, the accusers or accuser
shall present a written accusation to the Grand Master, or
one of the Deputy Grand Masters, who shall summon a lodge
of Masters or Past Masters, of not less than three, nor
more than thirteen — one of whom shall be nominated to pre-
side as Master — who shall proceed to try the cause, and pro-
nounce such sentence as they may deem just ; but the same
shall not take effect until approved by the officer summon-
ing such lodge. — Const. Geo.

Nor shall any subordinate lodge have the right to try its
Master ; but any five members of a lodge may impeach their
Master, by filing charges and specifications against him, with
the Grand Secretary, who shall cite him before the Grand
Lodge to answer the same. — Const. Fla.

Nor has any lodge the power to try its Master ; but any
three members may prefer charges for neglect or malconduct
to the Grand Lodge. — Const. D. C.

A lodge has not a right to try its Master ; but any five
members of his lodge may impeach him before the Grand
Master, who shall order three Masters of lodges, or Past Mas-
ters nearest his lodge, to investigate the charges, and report
to the Grand Master, who may suspend the delinquent, and
summon him to appear before the Grand Lodge for trial. —
Const. Ala.

Nor shall any charge be entertained against him (the Mas-
ter) by his lodge, during his term of office ; but he shall be
amenable for his conduct to the Grand Lodge only. — Const.
Oregon.

* Willfully disregarding the by-laws of his lodge, or acting otherwise unma-
Bonically.

GRAND LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION. 43

Charges against the Master of a lodge can only be presented
to the Grand Lodge, while he continues in office, or within
one year thereafter. — Const. Minn.

The Master of the lodge, during the term of his office, can
only be held amenable, for any offense committed, to the Grand
Lodge, to which charges should be preferred. — Const. Iowa.

The Master of a lodge cannot, in my opinion, consistently
with masonic usage, be tried by his lodge for an offense. —
G. M. of Cal, 1855.

No subordinate lodge has power to try charges against the
presiding officer thereof. But any three members can prefer
charges for neglect or malconduct against him, to the Grand
Lodge, or Grand Steward's Lodge. — Const. Md.

We believe it is well settled, by nearly every Grand Lodge
in the United States, that, agreeably to masonic law, the power
of a Master in his lodge is absolute. *****
For no misdemeanor, however great, can he be tried by his
lodge.— C. F. C, Fla., 1848.

Vermont adheres to the doctrine here laid down, that the
Master of a lodge is only amenable to the Grand Lodge, and
that he cannot be tried by a subordinate lodge. — Haswell,
C. F. C, Vt, 1849.

The committee fully agree with the Convention,* that a
subordinate lodge has not the right to try its Master, but that
he is amenable to the Grand Lodge alone. — Com. Mass., 1843.

A lodge cannot try, suspend, or expel its own Master. —
Iowa, 1848. \

The question has been settled, by a majority of writers, that
a lodge cannot try its Master. This principle is undoubtedly
correct. — Morris.

The proceedings of a lodge, in expelling its Master, are
illegal, and, therefore, void. A Grand Master is not deposed
from his station in Grand Lodge, in consequence of his expul*
eion by a subordinate lodge. — C. W. Moore, 1844.

* Baltimore " National Masonic Convention," 1843

44 GRAND LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION.

Resolved, That charges cannot be preferred against a pre-
siding officer to the lodge, while he occupies the chair, and
exercises the functions of Master. — S. C, 1856.

The Master of a lodge is not, and cannot be made, its crea-
ture.— C. F. C, Iowa, 1858.

For no misdemeanor, however great, can the Master be
tried by his lodge. — Mackey.

No lodge can exercise penal jurisdiction over its own Mas-
ter, for he is alone responsible for his conduct to the Grand
Lodge. But it may act as his accuser before that body, and
impeach him for any offense that he may have- committed. —
Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 338.

The Master of a lodge can only be tried by a Grand
Lodge.— C. F. C, Fla., 1850.

It is not in the power of a lodge to remove its Master. —
Heard, Mass., 1856.

A subordinate lodge has not the right to try its Master ;
he is amenable to Grand Lodge alone. — Reg. Miss. ; C. F. C.
of Tenn., 1845 ; N. Y., 1843 ; Reg. Ark.

A ledge cannot enter upon proceedings against a Master
in his own lodge, for any cause whatever. — Hubbard, Ohio,
1851.

The Master of a lodge can only be tried by the Grand
Lodge. — lb.

I know of no satisfactory authority for the assertion that
the Grand Master, and the Masters of subordinate lodges,
cannot be tried by the subordinate lodges to which they
belong, for any thing, and certainly it is without reason. —
Downey, G. M., Ind., 1857. This is sound doctrine. — O'Sulli-
van, C. F. C, Mo., 1858.

Subordinate lodges shall have power to try, and suspend
or expel their Master, for any unmasonic conduct not grow-
ing out of the discharge of his official duties. When the
Master of a lodge is under trial, the officer next in rank, or
some Past Master to be designated by him, shall preside.

GRAND LODGES — RULES OP ORDER. 45

When the Master of a lodge is expelled or suspended, the
officer next in rank shall succeed to the station. The Grand
Master, and Masters of subordinate lodges, are answerable
only to the Grand Lodge, for acts growing out of their official
duties. — Reg. Ind., 1858. Should be repealed at once. — C. W.
Moore, 1859.

It has always appeared to me that it would be no invasion
of an ancient masonic usage, to require the Master of a lodge
to answer to his lodge for any moral delinquency. — Ander-
son, G. M. 111., 1855.

Miscellaneous. — A Grand Lodge has original jurisdiction
over its subordinate lodges, as lodges; and, if a majority of
the members of any lodge commit a masonic offense, the
Grand Lodge has power to try, and suspend or expel them,
individually. But if a less number than a majority of any
lodge render themselves liable to discipline, the subordinate
lodge itself has original jurisdiction.

The Grand Lodge has original jurisdiction over a corrupt
subordinate lodge, not merely in its lodge capacity, but over
the individual members. — Iowa, 1851.

Has not a Past Grand Master a right to be tried by his
peers ? Ans. Most certainly. Who are his peers ? Ans.
All master masons in good standing. When a Master retires
from the post to which his merit elevated him, he leaves all
privileges, all rights behind him, and becomes a private mem-
ber, as before. His title is all that is left him of his crown of
honors. — Morris.

Kules of Order, for the Government of Grand Lodges.

Most of the Grand Lodges have adopted a series of Rules
of Order, for their own government and convenience. These
several codes differ but little from each other, and have not
keen deemed of sufficient importance to justify their full
insertion in this work. But, as a guide in such proceedings,
we append the code adopted by the Grand Lodge of
Maine, which may be considered one of the best, and, except
* rule 4," of general application.

46 GRAND LODGES — RULES OF ORDER.

1. None but members of the Grand Lodge, past officers of
other Grand Lodges excepted, shall be present at the opening
of the same, nor shall any visitor be admitted during the
session, except by permission of the Grand Master, or by vote
of the Grand Lodge.

2. Members and visitors shall keep the seats assigned
them, except the Grand Marshal, and officers whose duties
may call them about the Lodge.

3. All resolutions shall be submitted in writing, before
there shall be any debate upon them ; as shall all motions, if
the presiding officer, or any brother, desire it.

4. In all elections, and upon every question which may
come before the Grand Lodge for decision, each member
present shall be entitled to one vote only, except upon a call
of any five members, in which case the vote shall be taken
by lodges, and each lodge represented shall then be entitled
to three votes, all of which shall be on the same side ; and
the representatives of each lodge respectively may decide on
which side of the question the votes of their lodge shall be
cast. A member cannot delegate his right of voting to
another.

5. Each member shall vote on all questions, except where
he is personally interested, unless excused by the Grand
Lodge.

6. Every member who speaks shall rise, and remain stand-
ing, addressing himself to the grand presiding officer ; nor
shall he be interrupted, unless by a call to order from the pre-
siding officer, or from some member of the Grand Lodge.

7. When a question is under debate, no motion shall be
received, except to amend, commit, lay on the table, or
postpone.

8. A motion to amend, until decided, shall preclude all other
amendments of the main question.

9. Any member may call for a division of the question,
where the same will admit of it.

10. No new motion, which totally changes the subject

GRAND LODGES — QUORUM. 47

matter on which the original motion was intended to operate,
shall be admitted, under color of amendments, as a substitute
for the motion under debate.

11. No member, except one of the majority which decided
the question, shall be allowed to move for a reconsideration.

12. After a motion is stated by the grand presiding officer,
it shall be deemed to be in the possession of the Grand Lodge,
but may be withdrawn by the mover, at any time, before
decision or amendment.

13. There shall be no debate upon any question after it has
been put by the grand presiding officer.

14. All motions and reports may be committed, at the
pleasure of the Grand Lodge.

15. While the grand presiding officer is addressing the
Grand Lodge, or putting a question, or a brother is speaking,
no member shall entertain any private discourse, or pass
between the speaker and the chair.

16. No brother shall leave the Grand Lodge during the
session, without permission of the Grand Master.

17. No brother shall speak more than twice upon the same
question, unless to explain, without permission from the
Grand Lodge.

Quorum.
The constitutions of the following Grand Lodges specify
how many subordinate lodges must be represented in Grand
Lodge, before it can proceed to* transact business ; the others
are silent upon the point. In the absence of any constitu-
tional provision, we think that a majority of all the lodges
under the jurisdiction should be considered necessary to con-
stitute a quorum for business.

In Connecticut, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Ne-
braska, the representatives of three lodges are sufficient to
constitute a quorum for business. In New York, ten lodges
are necessary, except on occasions of ceremony.

In Pennsylvania, Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, Ten-

48 GRAND LODGES — WHO CAN PRESIDE.

nessee, Texas, and Maryland, five lodges must be repre*
sented.

The constitution of the District op Columbia requires tho
representation of a majority of all the lodges, before any
business can be transacted in Grand Lodge.

In Alabama, one-third of all the lodges is necessary.

In Louisiana, one-eighth of all the chartered lodges must
be represented, for the transaction of ordinary business ; one-
fourth at the election of officers, or changing by-laws or regu-
lations ; and one-half at the amending of the constitution.

In Ohio and Indiana, ten lodges constitute a quorum for
business, but a smaller number may meet and adjourn from
day to day.

In Michigan, a representation from nine lodges constitutes
a quorum for business.

In Minnesota and Kansas, the representatives of two-thirds
of all the lodges are necessary to open or transact business.

In Kentucky, one-third, or in cases of emergency, one-fourth.
of all the lodges must be represented, before the Grand Lodge
is opened to work.

In Missouri, representatives from thirty lodges are neces-
sary to a quorum for business ; but a less number may
adjourn, and at such adjourned meeting, ten lodges constitute
a quorum.

Who Can Preside.
The order of succession to the chair, in Grand Lodge, is
usually prescribed in the respective grand constitutions ;
though the usage is not uniform in regard to such succession.
For the purpose of economizing space, we give below what
seems to us a consistent and proper order of succession, and
then note the constitutional rule of the several Grand Lodges.
1. Grand Master. 2. Deputy Grand Master. 3. Senior
Grand Warden. 4. Junior Grand Warden. 5. Past Grand
Masters. 6. Past Deputy Grand Masters. 7. Past Grand
Wardens. 8. Past Masters. (Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, according to
seniority in office.)

GRAND LODGES — WHO CAN PRESIDE. 49

In either case, the brother entitled to the honor may waive
his right in favor of another who is a Past Master. Only a
Past Master can preside in Grand Lodge.

The above is the constitutional rule in the Grand Lodges
of Maine, Massachusetts, and Wisconsin.

In South Carolina, the rule is the same, except that the
Master of the senior lodge takes the chair instead of (8).

The constitution of the Grand Lodge of New York makes
no provision beyond (4).

In New Jersey, after (4), the present and Past Grand offi-
cers, and Past Masters of lodges, according to seniority, take
the chair. The Grand Master may, however, issue a special
commission to any particular brother to preside in his absence.

In Pennsylvania, after (5), the Master of the senior lodge
present is entitled to preside. But the Grand Master may
commission any Grand officer, or present or Past Master of a
lodge, to supply his place, in the absence of the Deputy and
Grand Wardens.

In the District of Columbia, after (7), the Master of the senior
lodge present, according to seniority, or, in the absence of
such, the senior Past Master present, succeeds to the chair.

In Virginia, after (4), the Master of the senior lodge
present, presides. The Grand Master has power, however,
to commission any member of the Grand Lodge to preside in
the absence of the Deputy.

In North Carolina, after (4), the senior Grand officer
present, takes the chair.

In Georgia, if the Grand Master be absent, the present or
Past Grand officer next in rank, who may be present, takes
the chair. If no Grand officer be present, then the Master of
the senior lodge presides.

In Alabama, after (6), the brethren nominate some suitable
person to fill the chair.

In Louisiana, after (4), the junior Past Grand officer, the
Highest in rank takes the east.
3

50 GRAND LODGES — WHO CAN PRESIDE.

In Kentucky, the succession to the chair is in the following
order : Deputy Grand Master, Senior Grand Warden, Junior
Grand Warden, Past Grand officers, according to rank and
seniority ; presiding Masters, according to rank ; Past Mas-
ters, according to rank and seniority.

In Tennessee, after (4), the oldest Grand officer present
takes the chair, unless there be present a Past Grand Master
or Deputy Grand Master.

In Arkansas, after (7), the Master of the senior lodge takes
the chair.*

In Texas, after (4), the senior Grand officer present fills the
chair.

If, at any Grand Lodge, stated or occasional, the Grand
Master be absent, the lodge shall be ruled by the Grand
officer next in rank or seniority, who may be present ; and, if
no Grand officer be present, by the Master of the senior
lodge. No brother below the rank of a Past Grand Master,
shall assume the Grand Master's chair, though he be entitled,
in the absence of the Grand Master, to rule the Grand
Lodge. — Const. Ca.

In Maryland, after (7), the Master of the senior lodge
present presides, but if none be present, the senior Past Mas-
ter present takes the chair.

The constitution of Nebraska makes no provision after (4).

In Mississippi, after (4), Past Grand officers, according to
rank ; then presiding Masters, do. ; and in absence of all,
Past Masters, according to seniority.

In Ireland, the succession is as follows : Grand Master,
Deputy do., Past Grand Masters, Past Deputy do., Senior
Grand Warden, Junior do., Grand Treasurer, Grand Secretary,
Grand Deacons, members of Grand Master's Lodge, Master of
Senior Lodge.

* This Grand Lodge has five District Deputy Grand Masters, who have the
same powers and privileges as Deputy Grand Masters in most other jurisdic-
tions. In the absence of the Grand Master, they succeed to the chair, accord
ing to the number of their districts.

GRAND LODGES — VACANCIES IS OFFICE. 51

In England, if the Grand Master be absent, the lodge is
ruled by the Grand officer, or Past Grand officer next in rank
and seniority, present ; and in absence of all such, by Master
of Senior Lodge.

In Scotland, the chair is filled in the following order :
Grand Muster, Deputy do., Substitute do., Senior Grand War-
den, Junior do., Master or proxy Master of Senior Lodge
present.

Vacancies in Office.

In case of a vacancy in any elective office in Grand Lodge
it would seem proper that it should be filled by pro tern.
appointments until the next stated time of election ; while a
vacancy in any other office may at any time be filled by the
appointing power.

Though there does not appear to be any well-defined,
general rule, touching a vacancy in the chair of a Grand
Lodge, we are of opinion that no new election should, in any
case, be had, until the next stated time of election ; but that
the same order of succession should prevail as in cases of
temporary absence ;* and the presiding officer be considered,
as to all intents and purposes, Grand Master, and proceed to
fill all other vacancies by pro tern, appointments.

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

In case of the death, resignation, or declination of any of
the Grand officers, the Grand Lodge may proceed to elect and
install a successor, at any regular communication after such'
event. — Const. R. I.

Should a vacancy occur in any office of the Grand Lodge,
the Grand Master shall nominate a qualified brother to supply
the place, pro tempore. Should the Grand Master die, during
his Grand Mastership, or be rendered incapable of discharging
the duties of his office, (by sickness, absence, or otherwise,)
the Deputy, or, in his absence, the District Deputy Grand
Master of the district, or, in his absence, the Grand Wardens,

* See " Who Can Preside."

i)2 GRAND LODGfifc — VACANCIES IN OFFICE.

shall assemble the Grand Lodge immediately, to record the
event; which Grand Lodge shall appoint three of its members
to invite the last preceding Grand Master to act until a new
election takes place ; should he decline, or be unable to act,
then the last but one, and so on ; if no former Grand Master
be found to act, the Grand Lodge shall be summoned to elect
a Grand Master. — Const. Ca.

In case the offices of Grand Master and Deputy Grand
Master should become vacant, by death or other means, the
Senior Grand Warden, or, in his absence, the Junior Grand
Warden, shall call on the last Past Grand Master to resume
the office and authority of Grand Master ; and if there be no
Past Grand Master in the town or place in which the Grand
Lodge holds its communications, the Grand Secretary, by
order of the Grand Wardens, or, should they refuse or be
absent, if he be called upon by the Masters of three lodges
for that purpose, shall summon the members of the Grand
Lodge to an extraordinary communication, for the purpose
of taking the matter into consideration, and choosing a new
Grand Master. — Const. Md.

In the event of the death, resignation, or removal of any
of the Grand officers during the recess of the Grand Lodge,
the Grand Master has authority to appoint any suitable
brother to fill the vacant station, and to install him into
office. — Const. Neb.

In case the chair of the Grand Lodge shall become vacated
by death, resignation, or otherwise, it shall be filled by the
Deputy Grand Master ; and in case any other office becomes
vacated by death, resignation, removal or otherwise, the
Grand Master, for the time being, shall fill such vacancy. —
Const. 111.

In case of the death, removal from the jurisdiction, resigna-
tion, or inability to serve, of any officer of the Grand Lodge,
the Grand Master shall have power to fill the vacancy by
appointment and installation, until the next annual communi«
cation. — Const. D. C.

GRAND LODGES VACANCIES IN OFFICE. 53

In case of the death of the Grand Master and the Deputy
Grand Master, or a vacancy in those offices from any other
cause, the Senior Grand Warden, and, in his absence, the
Junior Grand Warden, shall call on the last Past Grand
Master to resume the office and authority of the Grand Mas-
ter ; and if there be no such Past Grand Master, or he
declines acting, then an extraordinary communication shall
be held for the purpose of choosing a new Grand Master. — lb.

Any Grand officer who shall, during the term for which he
was chosen, withdraw from the lodge of which he was a
member at the time, shall thereby vacate such office, and his
seat as a member of the Grand Lodge. — Const. Mich.

The constitution of Wisconsin is the- same as above, with
the addition, " unless he unite with some other lodge under
this jurisdiction."

Vacancies may be filled by temporary appointment from
the Grand Master, till the next annual election. — Const. Min.

Any Grand officer withdrawing himself, during his appoint-
ment as a Grand officer, from the private lodge to which he
belonged at the time of his election, shall, in that case, vacate
his seat in the Grand Lodge. — Const. Ky.

The Grand Master has power to fill any vacancy that may
occur in any Grand office, by death or refusal to serve. — lb.

In case the chair of the Grand Lodge shall become vacant
by death, resignation, or otherwise, it shall be filled by the
Senior Grand Warden, until the next annual communication,
and upon his death, resignation, or inability, by the Junior
Grand Warden; but the Deputy Grand Master ceases to
exist as such so soon as the chair becomes vacated by the
Grand Master who appointed him; and in case any other
office becomes vacated, by death, resignation, or otherwise,
(except the Senior Grand Warden, in which case the Junior
Grand Warden fills the vacancy,) the Grand Master, for the
time being, shall fill such vacancy by nomination. — Const. Iowa.

In case of death, resignation, or removal from office, the

54 GRAND LODGES — ELIGIBILITY TO OFFICE.

chair of the Grand Lodge should become vacated, it is to be
filled by the Deputy Grand Master, with authority to appoint
his deputy, to serve until the next annual communication. — ■
Const. Texas.

Eligibility to Office in Grand Lodge.

In the absence of any constitutional provision, it may be
considered as well settled, that only those who have regularly
" Passed the Chair " in a subordinate lodge, are eligible to
either of the first four offices in a Grand Lodge, or to that of
District Deputy Grand Master ; while a master mason, who
is a member of some lodge in the jurisdiction, is eligible to
either of the other offices.

The above is the rule in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hamp-
shire, Vermont, Rhode Island, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Ohio, Indiana, Minnesota, Iowa * Arkansas, Mary-
land, and Nebraska.

In New Jersey, no one can be elected or appointed to any
office in Grand Lodge, unless he has passed the chair of some
regular lodge.

In New York, full membership in a lodge is necessary to
constitute eligibility to office in a Grand or subordinate lodge,
or to constitute and continue membership in Grand Lodge.

In Pennsylvania, all the officers, except the Chaplain and
Tiler, must be members of the Grand Lodge.

No brother can be a Grand Warden until he has been
Master of a lodge. — Ancient Consts., 1723.

All the Grand officers must be Past Masters. — Const. Bel.

No person can be elected an officer of the Grand Lodge
unless he be a master mason, and a member of a lodge subor-
dinate to this Grand Lodge, and entitled to a seat in the same
provided, he is not thereby raised to a grade higher than what
he may have attained in a subordinate lodge working under
this jurisdiction. — Const. Fla.

* These Grand Lodges require that he should have passed the chair in their
respective jurisdictions.

GRAND LODGES — CONFERRING DEGREES. 55

No brother can be an officer or member of the Grand Lodge
unless he be a master mason, and, at the same time, a con-
tributing member of some lodge under this jurisdiction. —
Const. D. C.

No member shall be eligible to an office, if, by his election
thereto, he shall be raised to a higher degree than he may
have attained in his lodge. — Const. Mich.

No brother shall be eligible to the office of Grand Master
Deputy Grand Master, Grand Warden, Grand Treasurer, or
Grand Secretary, unless he be a Past Master. — Consts. Wis.,
Tenn., CaL, Oregon.

Every Grand officer shall be chosen from among the work-
ing members of the several subordinate lodges, provided he
is not thereby raised to a higher degree than what he may
have attained in his lodge. — Const. Ky.

None except such as have attained to the degree of Past
Master, and are, at the time of their election or appointment,
members of some lodge, shall be eligible to any office in the
Grand Lodge. — Const. Mo.

In Canada, no one is eligible to the office of Grand Master,
Deputy Grand Master, Grand Warden, Chaplain, Treasurer,
Pvegistrar, or Grand Secretary, unless he has been regularly
installed Master of a private lodge.

No brother can be a Grand officer, unless he be a master
mason; nor Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master, Grand
Warden, or Grand Secretary, unless he shall have been Mas-
ter of a lodge for at least six months. — Const. Md.

It is unmasonic to elect any one a Grand Warden, who is
not a Past Master.— Res. Mo., 1843.

In Kansas, master masons are eligible to any office in Grand
Lodge, except those of Grand and Deputy Grand Master.

Conferring Degrees.
Upon the question of the right of a Grand Lodge to confer
the degrees within its own body, there is a wide difference

56 GRAND LODGES — WORK.

of opinion, though all unite in declaring its exercise, at the
present time, inexpedient. That Grand Lodges did once
possess and exercise this right, is too 'well known to be dis-
puted ; and we have been unable to find any regulation or
act of general binding force, indicating its surrender or for-
feiture. Its present exercise is unnecessary and inexpedient,
but we have no doubt of its existence, and that any Grand
Lodge may exercise it at its discretion.

Even admitting the right, its great inexpediency is too
palpable to admit of an argument. — Parvin, C. F. C, Iowa,
1848.

The conferring of the symbolic degrees of Masonry upon a
candidate in Grand Lodge, is a practice not only highly inex-
pedient, and injurious to the cause of Masonry, but unma-
sonic. — Res. Iowa, 1848.

A Grand Lodge has not the right or power to confer de-
grees.— Parvin, C. F. C, Iowa, 1850 ; Mason, C. F. C, Ind.,
1851.

A Grand Lodge, as such, has no right to initiate. — C. Moore,
Mas. Rev., v., 347.

Grand Lodges have the flight to confer degrees. — C. F. C,
Fla., 1850.

Work.

In no event ought the Grand Lodge to initiate, pass, or
raise a candidate, their power being more of an appellate and.
legislative order, than otherwise. — Res. Ala., 1848.

We think Grand Lodges have the right of conferring the
degrees, but doubt the expediency of exercising the right,
under the existing organization of Grand Lodges in the
United States.— C. F. C. of N. H., 1851.

We conclude that the Grand Lodge has the right to confer
degrees, but, under existing circumstances in this country,
the right should not be exercised under ordinary circum-
stances —C. F. C, Mo., 1850

GRAND LODGES — POWERS AND PRIVILEGES OF G. M. 57

After a review of all that lias been said upon the subject, we
Eay that the general conclusion seems to be that the Grand
Lodge, as a Grand Lodge, cannot confer degrees. — C. F. C,
Ky., 1850.

Resolved, That the exercise of the right to confer degrees
in Grand Lodge, is highly inexpedient, and should never
hereafter be exercised by this Grand Lodge, except in cases
of most extraordinary emergency. — Wis., 1849.

If a Grand Lodge has power to constitute lodges, with
authority to make masons, it is clear that it possesses power
to do it by itself. But as now constituted, we do not think it
expedient that Grand Lodges should do so. — C. F. C, La.,
1850.

"We deny the right of a Grand Lodge, as now organized, to
initiate, pass, or raise a candidate. — Com. C. F. C, Va., 1858.
(Adopted.)

Grand Master— His Powers and Privileges.

As we have inserted, under their appropriate heads, the
several powers and privileges specified in each Grand con-
stitution as belonging to the office of Grand Master, we shall,
in this place, simply enumerate those which are generally
acknowledged as such. By so doing, we avoid unnecessary
repetition, and economize space. Though some of those
enumerated below are abridged or denied in particular Grand
Lodge jurisdictions, they may be considered as generally ad-
mitted.

1. The Grand Master has power and authority to convene
the Grand Lodge at pleasure.

2. To convene any lodge under his jurisdiction, preside
therein, inspect their proceedings, and require their conform-
ity to the regulations and edicts of the Grand Lodge.

3. To exercise a general supervision and government over
the fraternity in bis jurisdiction, during the recess of the
Grand Lodge.

58 GRAND LODGES — ELIGIBILITY TO OFFICE.

4. To grant dispensations during the recess of Grand
Lodge for new lodges ; to make more than five brothers at
one meeting ; to hold public celebrations ; to form public pro-
cessions ; to dispense with the " one month's previous notice "
in conferring the degrees ; and to elect an officer or officers
of a subordinate lodge at some other than the stated time for
election.

5. To constitute new lodges, and install their officers ; to lay
corner-stones, and dedicate masonic halls, (either in person or
by proxy.)

6. To arrest the dispensation or charter of any lodge, and
to suspend a brother or a lodge until the next communication
of Grand Lodge.

7. To require the attendance of, and information from, any
of his Grand officers, respecting their office.

8. To preside in Grand Lodge; decide all questions of
order; (from his decision, while in the chair, there is no
appeal ;) appoint all committees not otherwise provided for ;
give a casting vote in case of a tie, (except in elections,) and
to preside as chairman, ex officio, in all committees he chooses
to attend.

9. To make masons at sight, (in a regular lodge, or one
summoned by him for that purpose.)

Eligibility to Office.
By an ancient regulation, contained in the old Charges, Past
Masters alone were eligible to the office of Grand Warden.
The Deputy Grand Master was also to be selected from among
the Masters or Past Masters of lodges. No such regulation
was in existence, as to the office of Grand Master, who might
be selected from the mass of the fraternity. At the present
time, in this country, it is usual to select the Grand officers
from among the Past Masters of the jurisdiction, though I
know of no ancient law making such a regulation obligatory,
except in respect to the offices of Grand Wardens and Deputy
Gra»d Master.— Mackey, P. M. £., 280.

GRAND LODGES — VOTE OF GRAND MASTER. 59

Grand Master— Vote in Grand Lodge.

The franchise of the officers of a Grand Lodge is usually
regulated by its constitution. It will be seen, below, that
most of the Grand Constitutions allow the presiding officer a
casting vote in case of a tie, though some of them limit the
privilege, and make an exception in cases of election. The
latter would seem to be a reasonable and proper restriction.

The presiding officer to have a casting vote, and no other. —
Const. Vt.

In New Hampshire, the Grand Master may vote in all cases
where the other members of the Grand Lodge are so entitled.

The presiding officer shall have the casting vote. — Consts.
Conn, and N. J.

Each member of the Grand Lodge has one vote, and the
acting Grand Master an additional vote in case of an equal
division. — Const. N. Y.

The Grand Master, or other presiding officer, having the
the casting vote. — Const. Penn.

The Grand Master, or presiding officer, one vote, except in
cases of an equal division, when he shall have two votes ;
provided they are not cases of election. — Const. Va.

On all occasions he shall be entitled to one vote, and if the
votes be equal, he shall then give the casting vote. — Const. S. C.

* •* * * And the M. W. Grand Master to two votes,
when the number of votes happen to be equal; otherwise
to but one. — Const. Ga.

The Grand Master, or presiding officer for the time being,
shall have the casting vote, except in the election of Grand
officers. — Const. D. C. and Fla.

On all questions where there is an equal division, the Grand
Master shall give the casting vote. — Const. Ind.

No officer or permanent member of the Grand Lodge shall
be entitled to more than one vote, unless he be a Master of
Warden of a subordinate body. — Const. Wis.

60 GRAND LODGES — MAKING MASONS AT SIGHT.

It is the duty of the Grand Master to give the casting vote
in the Grand Lodge whenever, on any question, there shall
be an equal number of votes. — Const. Min.

The Grand Master, or presiding officer, having one vote. —
Const. Ky.

In all other matters, besides elections, in case of a tie, the
Grand Master, or the brother in the chair, shall have the
casting vote. — Const. Tenn.

Each officer and member of the Grand Lodge present, shall
be entitled to cast one vote ; but no one, in his own right,
shall give more than one vote. — Const. Mo.

Whenever, on any question before the Grand Lodge, there
shall be an equal number of votes, he (the Grand Master)
shall give the casting vote. — lb. and R. I.

In case of a tie, the presiding officer shall give the casting
vote. — Consts. Ark., Texas, Col., Oregon, Neb., and Kansas.

The Grand Master, or presiding officer, shall have the cast-
ing vote in all cases, except in the election of Grand officers
to be installed.* — Const. Md.

The Grand Master, or presiding officer, a casting vote, if
the numbers be equal. — Consts. Ireland and Scotland.

The Grand Master, or brother officiating as such, shall have
the casting vote. — Const. Del.

Grand Master— Making Masons at Sight.
The right of a Grand Master to assemble a number of breth-
ren, at any time or place, and there to confer the degrees upon
a candidate, has been, and is, both admitted and denied.

The existence of this prerogative is denied by the Grand
Lodges of Missouai, Tennessee, Louisiana and Massachusetts ;
while it is admitted by those of New York, Kentucky, North
Carolina, South Carolina, Wisconsin, Vermont, Mississippi

* In this Grand Lodge, the Grand Standard-Bearer, Sword-Bearer, Deacons,
Stewards, Pursuivant, Director of Ceremonies, Inspectors, and Grand Tiler, an
nai installed.

GRAND LODGES — MAKING MASONS AT SIGHT. 61

Ohio, New Hampshire, Maryland, Indiana, Texas and Flori-
da; in the last two, subject to limitation.

In the exercise of this prerogative, the Grand Master cannot
dispense with any of the requisite forms of initiation, pre-
scribed by the oral laws of the order. He must adhere to all
the established ceremonies ; must be assisted by the number
of brethren necessary to open and hold a lodge ; due inquiry
must be made into the candidate's character; (though the
Grand Master may dispense with the usual probation of a
month;) and must conform to the ancient usages and land-
marks of the order. — Mackey, P. M. L., 51.

We think that a Grand Master, for policy's sake, should
decline to exercise this power, even if it were more clearly
established than it is. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 87.

We deny to Grand Masters the right, in its literal sense. —
C. Moore, Mas. Rev., v., 347.

The only way to become a mason, legally, since the re-
organization of the craft in 1717, that we ever heard or read
of, is through the intervention of some legally constituted
lodge.— lb., viii., 102.

I have thus far, when exercising this high prerogative, ob-
tained the written consent of the nearest lodge, and caused
the degrees to be conferred in a regular lodge ; yet a case
might occur in which I would deem it my duty to exercise
this ancient and high prerogative, and make a mason at sight,
without the intervention of a lodge or other assistance. — Hub-
bard, G. M. Ohio, 1851.

A Grand Master has most assuredly power to assemble
master masons about him, and make masons at will; and by
prerogative rights from time immemorial. — C. F. C, Cat, 1851.

We think: the better opinion is, that the Grand Master may
make masons at sight in any regular lodge in his jurisdiction,
by assent and assistance of such lodge, after due inquiry into
character of candidate, the Grand Master dispensing with tho
usual time required for that purpose. — Pike, C.F. C.,Ark.,l853*

62 GRAND LODGES — MAKING MASONS AT SIGHT.

It is the prerogative of the Grand Master to make masons
at sight ; and for this purpose he may summon to his assist-
ance such brethren as he may deem necessary. — Const. Ohio,
1842.

The Grand Master has the power of making masons at
sight, but only in a Grand Lodge, convened for that purpose,
— C. F. C, Fla., 1850.

It is the prerogative of the Grand Master to make masons
at sight ; and for this purpose to summon to his assistance
such brethren as he may deem necessary. — Cons'. Neb.

Grand Masters have the right to confer degrees, independ-
ent of subordinate lodges. — Blackemer, C. F. C. of N. C, 1851.

From immemorial usage, the Grand Master of a Grand Lodge
has power to assemble masons, and confer the degrees upon
a candidate, at pleasure. — Res. Cal., 1851.

Grand Masters of Grand Lodges have power to assemble
masons, and confer the degrees upon a candidate, at pleasure.
— C. F. C, N. H., 1852.

No instance of it has occurred in Vermont, but the right
has never been questioned in this jurisdiction. — Tucker, G. M.
Vt., 1853.

From the whole premises, we deduce the conclusions which
seem to be inevitable, from a calm survey of history, and of
the principles laid down in our ancient Constitutions, that the
Grand Master has not the power to make masons out of a reg-
ular lodge or Grand Lodge ; that he has the authority to do
so in either of these bodies, when regularly constituted, or
may grant his dispensation to a lodge for the same purpose. —
King, C. F. C. of N. Y, 1854.

In which opinion we coincide. — G. W. C.

The Grand Master has the power to do so in Grand Lodge
or in a subordinate lodge. — Hayward, G. M. Fla., 1854.

The Grand Master may make masons at sight, in person and
in a lawful lodge, and may grant a dispensation to a lodge for
the same purpose. — Const. N. Y.

GRAND LODGES — MAKING MASONS AT SIGHT. 63

The Grand Master cannot constitutionally grant a dispensa-
tion for, nor delegate his prerogative of making a mason ak
sight. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

It is our belief that neither the Grand Master nor the Grand
Lodge have the right to make masons at sight ; nor do we
think they have possessed the power since 1717. That the
Grand Master may, upon application to him, summon one of
the lodges under his jurisdiction — not any number of masons
promiscuously ; lay the petition before it ; order the ballots
passed ; and, if found clear, initiate — thereby dispensing with
time — we concede : but to grant that he possesses the sole
power of determining who may or shall become masons, and
then to make them without the intervention of a lodge, is to
subvert the entire groundwork of Masonry. — Parvin, C. F. C,
Iowa, 1852.

Since the time when the memory of masons runneth not to
the contrary, Grand Masters have enjoyed the high preroga-
tive of making masons at sight, without any preliminaries,
and at any suitable time and place — they alone being the
judges of the propriety, the time, and the place. For so doing,
no earthly power can call them to account: And they may
call upon the Grand Lodge, or any subordinate lodge, or any
number of master masons, to assist; and when called upon
thus, they are bound to obey. — Hatch, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1850.

This lodge can not, and does not, recognize any inherent
right, or power, or prerogative, in Grand Masters to make
masons at sight or will, oat of a regular lodge, and must regard
the exercise of any such power, not only as tyrannical, but in
violation of the plain and unmistakable provisions of the an-
cient Constitutions of Masonry. This Grand Lodge cannot
recognize any other mode of making masons than the one
sanctioned by the immemorial usage of the craft, namely: in a
regular lodge, after previous notice and due inquiry into char-
acter.— Res. Texas, 1854.

Resolved, That in the opinion of this Grand Lodge, no Grand
Master has the right to make masons at sight, or at will, and

64 GRAND LODGES — MAKING MASONS AT SIGHT.

that no man can be regularly made a mason, except by a
regular lodge, working under a regular charter or dispensa-
tion.— La., 1853.

The Grand Master of a Grand Lodge possesses delegated
powers only; and as the power to initiate, pass, and raise, are
not delegated to a Grand Master to be exercised at will, he
can confer those degrees only in a subordinate lodge, and in
accordance with masonic law and usage. — Res. Fla., 1854.

We are aware that the law provides for his making masons
at sight ; but it is a right which we deny to any one, be he
Grand or Subordinate Master, unless done in the right way
— in some place representing a lodge, in which is placed,
in masonic form, the Holy Bible, square and compasses, with
the requisite number of brethren. — Jordan, C. F. C, of N. C,
1853.

We find, in the Old Cnarges and Regulations, no principle or
semblance of a principle that can be construed as a recogni-
tion of this inherent right claimed for Grand Masters. He
can grant dispensations for new lodges, and for conferring
degrees ; but the right of members to say who are fit recipi-
ents of Masonry, can never be dispensed. — Foster, C. F. C,
Mo., 1853..

We cannot concede that the Grand Master may make
masons, without regard to conditions or limitations. In this
way only (after regular proposition, due inquiry, and ballot,
in a regular lodge,) can any person be lawfully and regularly
accepted a freemason. It is the prerogative of the Grand
Lodge to make masons at sight ; and if it is the prerogative
of the Grand Lodge, it is not the prerogative of the Grand
Master. His authority to do so, is a limited and qualified
power, and can be exercised only " when the Grand Lodge is
duly assembled." — C. W. Moore.

All the authorities cited in proof of this power, only exhibit
an exact compliance with the regulation, that "no person
shall be made a mason, except in a regular lodge." — Fuller,
C. F. C., Tenn., 1852.

GRAND LODGES — MAKING MASONS AT SIGHT.

Resolved, as the opinion of this Grand Lodge, That the au-
thority to confer degrees does not exist in the Grand Master,
except in Grand Lodge, duly assembled, or in a subordinate
lodge, organized in a constitutional manner, and in no case
without due inquiry into the character of the candidate, and
upon a unanimous ballot of the lodge. — Wis., 1849.

Under no circumstances has a Grand Master a right to
make masons, or to authorize it to bo done in any other way
than is provided by the Grand Lodge over which he pre-
sides.—C. R C, Mo., 1850.

SUBORDINATE LODGES

WHO MAY GEANT DISPENSATIONS FOE.

In the following Grand Lodge jurisdictions, only the Grand
Master has power to grant dispensations for new lodges, viz :
Maine, New Hampshiee, Massachusetts, Vieginia, Kentucky,
Aekansas, Califoenia, Maeyland, Mississippi, and Rhode
Island.

In Yeemont, the power is not specifically granted to any
officer, yet as it declares that " the Grand Master enjoys all
the powers and prerogatives conferred by the Ancient Con*
stitutions, and the usages and landmarks of the craft," it
doubtless includes the one under consideration as among
them. The usage in that jurisdiction being the same in this
respect as in those above named, confirms the correctness of
this conclusion.

In Iowa, Oeegon Nebeaska, Canada, Kansas, and DeLa-
waee, the Grand M nsler, or his Deputy, has power to grant
dispensations during the recess of Grand Lodge.

In Missouei and Texas, the Grand Master, Deputy Grand
Master, or District Deputy Grand Master, may grant dispen-
sations for new lodges.

Dispensations are confided to the Grand Master, or his
representative. The dispensing power is confined to four
circumstances: 1. Empowering a constitutional number of
brethren to open and hold a lodge until the next communi-
cation of the Grand Lodge. 2. Empowering a lodge to in-
itiate more than five candidates at the same communication.
3. Allowing a brother to belong to more than one lodge. 4.
Empowering a lodge to hold an election for officers at some
other than tne constitutional time. — Mackey, Lexicon, 114.

SUBORDINATE LODGES — TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION. 61

Territorial Jurisdiction.
The general rule is, that the jurisdiction of a lodge extends
in eve,ry direction to the geographic centre between it and
adjacent lodges. The only general exception to the rule
is, that the jurisdiction of a lodge cannot extend into
another state, unless by consent of the Grand Lodge of such
other state.

The jurisdiction of a lodge must be considered as half the
distance to the next nearest lodge. — Hartsock, G. M. Iowa,
1859.

The geographical jurisdiction of a lodge extends, in every
direction, half way to the nearest lodge, but not beyond that
of its own Grand Lodge. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 335.

The jurisdiction of a lodge can in no case extend beyond
the state line. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev., vi.,47.

The masonic jurisdiction of each subordinate lodge in this
state shall extend, in every direction, to half the distance
from its usual place of meeting to the usual place of meeting
of the adjoining lodges ; provided, that such jurisdiction shall
not extend into a town where another lodge is located. Pro-
vided, also, that such jurisdiction may, at any time, be mod-
ified by mutual agreement of the lodges interested, or by the
action of the Grand Lodge. — Const. Conn.

In no instance has a subordinate lodge a right to receive
a candidate from another state, where a Grand Lodge has
been regularly established, and in the exercise of its authority,
without its consent. And the subordinate lodges should pay
attention to their jurisdiction, which is an equal distance be-
tween each other ; and in no case receive a candidat^from the
jurisdiction of another subordinate lodge, without a proper
explanation, and the unanimous consent of the lodge in whose
Jurisdiction he resides. — Const. Fla.

The territorial jurisdiction of a lodge extends to a point
half way between it and the nearest lodge in the same
state.— Lewis, G. M. of N. Y., 1858.

68 SUBORDINATE LODGES — NUMBER OF PETITIONERS FOR.

The universally recognized rule in this country is, that the
jurisdiction of every lodge covers, at least, the territorial
extent of the town where it is located. * * * The
jurisdiction of each lodge extends, in every direction, to the
geographical center ^between all contiguous lodges. — C. W.
Moore.

The territorial jurisdiction of a lodge extends to the geo-
graphical center between it and all contiguous lodges. —
Res. Mich, 1848 ; Ark., 1851.

Number of Petitioners for.

The well-settled and almost universal usage is, that a dis-
pensation or charter cannot be granted, except upon petition
of at least seven master masons, in good standing.

The constitutions of the following Grand Lodges require
the above number : Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massa-
chusetts, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Delaware,
Maryland, Virginia, District of Columbia, Georgia, South
Carolina, Missouri, Tennessee, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana,
Florida, Alabama, Arkansas, Texas, California, Oregon,
North Carolina, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Kansas, Can-
ada, England, and Scotland.

In Pennsylvania, a warrant is granted on petition of at least
five master masons, on the recommendation of at least three
master masons.

In Ohio and Nebraska, the petition of at least eight master
masons is required, one of whom must be a Past Master.

In Connecticut, charters are granted on petition of five or
more master masons.

In Ireland, to any number not under three of master masons.

Not less than three master masons should sign the pe-
tition.— Dalcho.

The constitutions of those Grand Lodges whose names do
not appear above, Michigan and Kentucky, are silent upon the
point; but we believe the usage in those jurisdictions re-
quires seven petitioners.

SUBORDINATE LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION. 69

Penal Jurisdiction.
The penal jurisdiction of a lodge extends over all masons
residing or sojourning within its geographical jurisdiction,
whether members of any lodge or not: and over its own
members* wheresoever they reside.

Over Members of Another Lodge. — A member is oubject
to the penal jurisdiction of the lodge within whose geograph-
ical jurisdiction he resides ; though, ae a general rule, such
lodge should not proceed to try him until after due notice
to the lodge to which he belongs, and in default of proper
action on the part of the latter. Such notice, however, is
rather a matter of courtesy than right, and may be given or
not, as the lodge in its discretion may decide.

The personal jurisdiction of a lodge extends over all masons
living within its vicinity. A master mason belonging to a
distant lodge, but residing within the geographical jurisdic-
tion of another lodge, becomes amenable for his conduct to
the latter as well as to the former lodge. But if his own
lodge is within a reasonable distance, courtesy requires that
the lodge near which he resides should rather make a
complaint to his lodge, than itself institute proceedings
against him. But the reputation of the order must not be permit-
ted to be endangered, and a case might occur in which it would
be inexpedient to extend this courtesy, and where the lodge
would feel compelled to proceed to the trial and punishment
of the offender, without applying to his lodge. The geograph-
ical jurisdiction will, in all cases, legalize the proceedings. —
Macket.

Resolved, That each lodge has penal jurisdiction over the
conduct of all the brethren residing within their geographical
jurisdiction respectively. Nevertheless, it is recommended
that, as a matter of courtesy, all such cases be referred to the
lodge of which the offending brother is a member, when it is
practicable to do so. — Mich., 1857.

The penal jurisdiction of a lodge is not confined to its own

* Except its Master. Vide Penal Jurisdiction 0/ Grand Lodge.

70 SUBORDINATE LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION.

members, but extends in some degree over all masons who
reside within its geographical jurisdiction. The geograph-
ical jurisdiction of a lodge radiates on all sides from the
common center, and extends in every direction half way to
the nearest lodge. Each regular lodge of master masons has
personal penal jurisdiction over all master masons residing
within its geographical jurisdiction, but belonging to a dis-
tant lodge ; and although courtesy requires that the lodge
near which he resides should rather make a complaint to the
lodge of which he is a member, than itself institute proceed-
ings against him, yet such a reference is simply an act
of courtesy, and may or may not be made in accordance with
the circumstances of the case.

The lodge of which any master mason is a member, and the
lodge within whose geographical jurisdiction he resides, have
co-extensive and concurrent jurisdiction over him, and he may
be charged and tried before either ; and an acquittal or con-
viction had before the one, will be a valid bar to all proceed-
ings before the other, upon the same charge. The only
exception to this rule is where two lodges have the. same
geographical jurisdiction by reason of their great proximity,
as where two or more lodges are located in the same city. —
Weston, Ashler, 1856.

In matters of grievance and complaint, recourse ought to be
first had to the lodge or lodges to which the parties respect-
ively belong, before application can be regularly made to the
Grand Lodge. — Res. Conn., 1796.

These considerations warrant us in the belief, that the
lodge or Grand Lodge of which a mason may be a member,
has exclusive jurisdiction in trying and punishing that mem-
ber for violating the masonic laws. A case in point was de-
cided by the Grand Lodge of Missouri, in 1852, sustaining
the views here advanced. — King, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1853.

A brother master mason trespassing against our rules, is
amenable to the particular lodge of which he is a member.
This rule applies with equal force against a sojourner who

SUBORDINATE LODGES PENAL JURISDICTION. fl

may commit an offense. The charges against him can only
be preferred in the lodge of which he is a member. — Mo., 1852.

We are of the same opinion. — Paryin, C. F. C, Iowa, 1852.

A mason living in the vicinity of a lodge, but a member of
a distant lodge, is subject to the authority of his own lodge
only.— Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

Over Entered Apprentices and Fellow Crafts. — Entered
apprentices and fellow crafts, though not eligible to member-
ship in any lodge, are amenable to the lodge within whose
jurisdiction they reside or sojourn, for unmasonic conduct;
and may be tried, suspended, or expelled bjT such lodge,
according to the gravity of the offense. They should be tried
in a lodge opened on the highest degree they have attained,
though the verdict should be given, and the punishment
assessed, when opened on the third degree.

I have no doubt of the power of a subordinate lodge to try a
fellow craft mason upon charges. — Hillyer, G. M. Miss., 1856.

An entered apprentice can be tried for immorality, &c., the
same as a master mason. — Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858

An entered apprentice, for unmasonic conduct, is subject
to discipline. The lodge within whose jurisdiction he re-
sides, and where the alleged offense was committed, has
jurisdiction in the premises, and may proceed to final action,
as in other cases. — Hubbard, G. M. Ohio, 1851.

A lodge of master masons has entire jurisdiction over all
the degrees it is authorized to confer; and as it admits
apprentices and fellow crafts, it may, for sufficient cause,
expel them.— C. W. Moore, 1846.

Over Offenses Committed Previous to Initiation. — As a
general rule, a lodge cannot deal with a mason for an offense
committed previous to his initiation. There are, however,
exceptions which justify such a course; and the better
opinion seems to be that each lodge is left to exercise its own
discretion in the matter, subject, of course, to the constitu-
tion and decisions of its Grand Lodge.

72 SUBORDINATE LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION.

Mackey, (S. C.,) King, (N. Y.,) and Pike, (Ark.,) sustain the
idea that masons may be tried for offenses committed before
initiation. Foster (C F. C, Mo., 1855) combats the idea.
Mellen (C. F. C. Miss., 1856) says: "A man commits a for-
gery, and, previous to the discovery of the crime, receives the
degrees. Is there no remedy ? We think the lodge might
proceed against him, by making the act relate to the time of
discovery, or by considering his petition an imposition upon
the lodge; or there may be some other mode; for it must
necessarily have some way for its self-protection, under the
general law of self-defense." Perkins (C. F. C.x La., 1856)
says : " We say no ; except in cases where the offense has
some connection with his admission into the order."

Great moral delinquencies, committed before initiation, un-
known to the lodge at initiation, of such magnitude as to ren-
der connection of delinquent with lodge a public reproach to
it, constitute good cause for expulsion. So, also, where the
delinquency would have barred initiation, had it been known
at the time, and the delinquent has not atoned for, or repented
of it, and his present life and conversation are dangerous to
the internal peace and public reputation of the lodge. — C. W.
Moore.

It is held, by the best authorities, that a lodge is not
in general required, nor would it be justified, in going behind
the brother's initiation, to find subjects for charges.— Morris,
Am. F. M., iii., 129.

As a general principle, a candidate, after initiation, cannot
be called upon to answer charges for an offense committed
before initiation ; though there are cases where it would be
proper. — Anderson, G. M. 111., 1855. Grand Loage do.

The Grand Lodge of Mississippi decided (1856) that a sub-
ordinate lodge may try and expel a member for a crime or
offense committed before he was made a mason, provided it be
for crimes designated as felonious by the laws of the country.

In our judgment, a mason cannot be tried for an offense
committed before initiation. — C. W. Moore, 1850.

SUBORDINATE LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION. 73

Over Masons under Suspension. — For a repetition of the
offense for which he was suspended, or other unmasonic con-
duct, a mason may be tried, and, if the offense justify it,
expelled, by the lodge having- personal jurisdiction over him.
Though the opinion has been advanced, that such mason
must first be reinstated or restored, before a second trial can
take place, the better opinion seems to be that such previous
action is improper and unnecessary.

A lodge has an undoubted right to try a brother under sus-
pension, on any new charge of unmasonic conduct, and expel
him, if the offense warrant, without waiting for the expiration
of the previous sentence. — C. W. Moore.

We think there can be no question but that a mason under
suspension can be dealt with, and expelled for heinous crime,
notwithstanding the sentence already against him. — C. Moore,
Bias. Rev., vii., 145.

A brother may very properly be tried for a repetition of an
offense, though still under suspension for the first offense. —
J. W. S. Mitchell, 1856. Lawrence, Sig. and Jour., 1856.

A member under suspension for a definite period, may be
charged, tried, and expelled, for gross misconduct. — Swigert,
G. 31. Ky., 1858.

Over Non-Affiliated Masons. — A subordinate lodge has
complete masonic jurisdiction over any and every mason re-
siding in its vicinity, though such mason may not be a member
of it, or of any other lodge ; and it may exercise all the rights
of discipline over him, the same as over one of its own
members.

We understand the rule to be, that a brother (non-affiliated)
is amenable for any offense committed against the laws of
Masonry, and in derogation of his obligations as a mason, to
the particular lodge within whose jurisdiction he resides,
and within which the offense is committed. — C. W. Moore.

A non-affiliated mason still remains subject to the govern-
ment of the order, and may be tried and punished for any
offense, as an affiliated mason would be, by the lodge within
4

74 SUBORDINATE LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION.

whose geographical jurisdiction lie resides. — Mackey, U. M.
£;, xvii., 295.

Every lodge shall exercise all the rights of discipline over
masons (not members thereof, or of any other lodge) who may
reside in the vicinity of such lodge, so far as may relate to
the conduct and behavior of such masons, whilst resident
in the vicinity of such lodge. — Const. Iowa.

Subordinate lodges not only possess the power, but it is
their duty to take cognizance of brethren within their vicin-
ities, (not being members of any lodge subordinate to this
Grand Lodge,) and to suspend or expel from the privileges
of the order any brother who shall be found guilty of unma-
sonic behavior. — Const. Ky.

Every Lodge shall exercise all the rights of discipline and
control over all masons resident in its jurisdiction, though not
members thereof, so far as relates to the conduct and be-
havior of such masons. — Const. Mo.

Every freemason is amenable to the constitutions, laws, and
regulations of the masonic jurisdiction in which he resides,
whether he be a member of a lodge or not. — Const. Texas.

In cases where the accused is not a member of any lodge,
the lodge within whose jurisdiction the offense shall have
been committed, may proceed as against a member thereof,
and censure, suspend, or expel the offender, as the nature of
the offense may require. — Const. N. H.

. Whenever a member of a lodge, or any mason under this
jurisdiction, shall be accused of an offense which, if proved,
would subject him to suspension or expulsion, the proceed-
ings shall, &c. — Consts. Cat, Mass., Me., Vt., Iowa, and Wis.

Every lodge may exercise all the rights of discipline over
masons, not members of any lodge, who reside in the vicinity
of such lodge, so far as may relate to the masonic conduct of
such masons, while resident therein. — Const. Fla.

Any lodge has the power of exercising, and it is its duty to
exercise, all the rights of discipline over masons not mem-

SUBORDINATE _,ODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION. 75

bers of any lodge, who reside in the vicinity of such lodge,
and who render themselves, by their conduct, amenable to
such discipline. — Const. D. C.

Every lodge has power, and it shall be its bounden duty,
to take cognizance of any unmasonic conduct of a sojourning
or resident brother, although not one of its members, * * *
and censure, suspend, or expel the offender. — Const. Ala.

Each lodge may take cognizance of the conduct of mason*
living within its jurisdiction, and not belonging to another
lodge under this Grand Lodge, and try, and punish them for
masonic offenses committed within its jurisdiction, or such as
may be referred to it by the lodge where the offense was
committed. — Const. La.

Lodges not only possess the power, but it shall be their
express duty to take cognizance of brethren within their ju-
risdiction, whether subordinate to the jurisdiction of this
Grand Lodge or otherwise, and to suspend or expel from the
privileges of the order any brother who shall be found guilty
of unmasonic conduct. — Consts. Inch. Ohio, Neb. .

Every lodge within this jurisdiction may exercise all the
rights of discipline over masons (not members thereof, or of
any other lodge) who reside in the immediate vicinity of such
lodge, so far as may relate to the behavior and conduct of
such masons, whilst resident in the vicinity of such lodge. —
Const. 111.

The judicial powers of a lodge embrace the exercise of dis-
cipline, and settlement of controversies between and over all
its members, (except the Master,) and over all masons and non-
affiliated brethren within its jurisdiction. — Consts. N. Y., Minn.

Subordinate lodges possess the power of calling to account,
for unmasonic conduct, any brother who may reside or be in
the vicinity of such lodge, whether he be a member of such
lodge or not, and of dealing with him accordingly. — Const.
Tenn.

Every lodge may exercise all the rights of discipline over
masons, not members of any lodge, who reside in the vicinity

76 SUBORDINATE LODGES -PENAL JURISDICTION.

of such lodge, so far as may relate to the masonic conduct of
such masons while resident therein. — Const. Md.

A mason not a member of any particular lodge, who hag
been guilty of immoral or unmasonic conduct, can be tried
by any lodge within whose jurisdiction he may be residing.—
King, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1853.

Every lodge has full power to call before it, and punish,
according to masonic usages, all delinquent masons residing
in its jurisdiction, whether they are members of such lodge
or not. — Reg. Miss.

A lodge has a right to try a non-affiliated mason for unma-
sonic conduct committed while residing within the limits of
said lodge, after he has removed out of its jurisdiction, as well
as out of the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge under which
such lodge is working. — G.M. Miss., 1848; G. Lodge do.;
C. W. Moore, do.

It is the duty of a lodge to take cognizance of the conduct
of any brother or brethren not attached to any lodge under
this jurisdiction, on a charge of unmasonic conduct, and rep-
rimand, suspend, or expel him from the rights and privi-
leges of Masonry. — Res. Cal., 1851.

Every lodge shall exercise all the right of discipline and
control over all masons resident in its jurisdiction, though
not members thereof, so far as relates to conduct and be-
havior of such masons. — Const. Kansas.

The lodge within whose jurisdiction they live, has jurisdic-
tion over them for unmasonic conduct. — Ark., 1848.

The jurisdiction of a lodge extends equally over affiliated
and non-affiliated masons, for unmasonic conduct— Neb., 1858.

Over Sojourners. — Upon the same principle that a lodge
has cognizance over a non-affiliated mason residing in its ju-
risdiction, it has also jurisdiction over a sojourner, or non-
resident, for unmasonic conduct while in its jurisdiction.

Any lodge may take cognizance of the conduct of any
sojourning brother or brethren not attached to any particular

SUBORDINATE LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION. 77

lodge, upon a charge of immasonic conduct. — Const*. Maine,
Mass., R. L, Wis., C. W. Moore, 1846.

Subordinate lodges have power, and may take cognizance of
any immoral or unmasonic conduct of a sojourning brother. —
Const. N. H.

Any lodge may take cognizance of the conduct of any so-
journing or resident brother, not attached to any particular
lodge, upon a charge of unmasonic conduct, while residing in
its jurisdiction. — Const. Vt.

A lodge has a right to try a sojourning non-affiliated
brother, while a resident within its jurisdiction, and even
after his removal from its jurisdiction and state. — Miss., 1851.

If charges are filed before a removal, the lodge having ju-
risdiction does not lose it by such removal ; but if the brother
(sojourning or non-affiliated mason) remove before the charges
are brought, the lodge loses its authority over him. What
gave the lodge jurisdiction over the brother ? Residence. A
change of residence will also take it away. — Mellen, 1855.

"Where a member removes into the jurisdiction of another
lodge, the latter may proceed to try him on charges of unma-
sonic conduct ; though, if convenient, and no injury will re-
sult from delay, it is best that the lodge to which he belongs
be notified. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

Miscellaneous. — Where two or more lodges are located in
the same town or city, they hold concurrent jurisdiction ;
though, with respect to non-affiliated masons, and residents or
sojourners who are members of some other lodge, it would
seem proper that the senior lodge should take precedence in
jurisdiction.

A lodge has no right to investigate the justness of an ex-
pulsion in another jurisdiction. — Armstrong, G. M. Ark., 1857.

A difficulty arising between two masons, members of differ-
ent lodges, each should be tried in his own lodge. — Smith,
G. M. Ark, 1856.

A lodge has the right of suspending or excluding a member

78 SUBORDINATE LODGES — PENAL JURISDICTION.

from his membership in the lodge ; but it has no po^ er to
expel him from the rights and privileges of Masonry, except
with the consent of the Grand Lodge. — Mackey, P. M. L., 107.

A lodge exercises penal jurisdiction over all its members,
no matter where they reside; over all unaffiliated masons
living within its geographical jurisdiction, (whether the res-
idence be temporary or permanent ;) over all masons living in
its vicinity ;* but not over masons (not its members) residing
in a neighboring state. Its jurisdiction can extend no further
than that of its own Grand Lodge. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii.,
337.

A lodge cannot exercise penal jurisdiction over the Grand
Master, although under other circumstances it might have
both geographical and personal jurisdiction over him, from
his residence and membership. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 338.

If any member of a lodge shall, from trifling, captious, sin-
ister, or unworthy motives, attempt to arrest the legitimate
work of his lodge, he shall thereby be rendered amenable to
masonic discipline. And it is made the duty of the lodges, in
all such cases, to proceed to the investigation thereof, and to
reprimand, suspend, or expel the offending member, as a ma-
jority present may deem best. — Const. Neb.

Where a member was known to have repeatedly black-
balled applicants, without good cause, and for unmasonic
reasons ; held, that the lodge had the right to proceed against,
and expel him. — 0. W. Moore.

If there be no provision in the Constitution of the Grand
Lodge, regulating the suspension in the subordinate lodges,
then the whole subject is within the control of the lodges ;
and they may suspend or reinstate a member, without the
concurrent action of the Grand Lodge. — C. W. Moore, 1849

In our opinion, all expulsions for unmasonic conduct should
originate in the lodge. Nothing is gained by trying such
cases in the chapter or encampment, when the offense is cog-
nizable by the lodge. — 0. W. Moore.

* See previous quotation from same authority under this head.

SUBORDINATE LODGES — QUORUM FOR BUSINESS. 79

A mason who has demittcd and removed into another juris*
diction, is out of the reach of his former lodge. — Morris, Am,
F. M., v., 101.

If a member is under charges for unmasonic conduct, can
he be permitted to have his trial in another lodge? He cam
not. He has no rights beyond the lodge that has jurisdiction
over him, except through appeal to the G. L. — Morris.

Quorum for Business.
The minimum number to whom a dispensation or charter
can be granted, may be considered as the minimum number
to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. If
seven be the number necessary to form a lodge, then seven is
the number necessary to continue a lodge, and to transact its
business. In the absence of any specific regulation, the
above rule should govern. (For information bearing upon
this point, see also authorities under the head of " Petitioners
for Charter," and " Surrendering Charter.")

No ballot shall be taken for initiation or membership,
unless there are at least seven members of the lodge pres-
ent.— Const. Me.

&U regular lodges under this jurisdiction, with not less than
seven members, have the right to convene, * * *. —
Const. N. C.

No ballot shall be held unless there are tit least seven mem-
bers present. — Const. D. C.

At least seven members of the lodge shall be present when
the ballot is taken. — Const. La.

No ballot shall be taken upon such petition, except seven
members are present. — Consts. Iowa, Missouri.

No ballot or vote shall be taken on any subject unless
there are present seven members of the lodge. — Const. Mo.

No ballot shall be taken unless there are present nine mem-
bers of the chapter.— .Res. Gr. Chap., Texas, 1855.

No ballot shall be taken unless there be present five mem*
bers of the lodge. — Const. Kansas.

80 SUBORDINATE LODGES — QUORUM FOR BUSINESS.

Three master masons is the least number that can ope a and
work in a lodge of master masons. With that number the
work would be legal. — Anderson, G. M. Ill, 1855 ; Grand
Lodge do.

Our understanding of the matter is, that it requires as
many to work as it does to open. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 26.

Cannot Work untdl their Officers are Installed. — In
the absence of any particular regulation, it may be considered
unnecessary for the officers of a lodge under dispensation to
be installed, or for it to be " set to work " with any formalities,
other than those attending the ordinary opening and working
of a lodge. But after a charter is granted to a lodge, pre-
viously working under a dispensation, it cannot work, or
even meet, as a lodge, until it has been regularly constituted,
and its officers installed. The dispensation expires with the
closing of the Grand Communication at which the charter is
voted. A lodge cannot commence work under its charter
until it has been duly constituted. The petitioners can pre-
viously meet, simply as masons, and not as a lodge.

No lodge is authorized to commence work under its char-
ter, until the officers thereof have been regularly installed. —
Consts. Ohio, Indiana, Nebraska.

Any lodge who shall receive a charter, shall have their offi-
cers regularly installed before they proceed to work under
the charter. — Const. Ky.

Cannot do any thing as a lodge until constituted, and officers
installed.— F. M. King, 1853.

A new lodge, after having its charter granted, cannot con-
fer degrees until the officers are regularly installed. — Hub-
bard, Ohio, 1853.

After a dispensation has been returned to the Grand Lodge,
and a charter granted, a lodge cannot work until the officers
are install ed.— Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 177.

SUBORDINATE LODGES — WHO CAN PRESIDE. 81

Who Can Preside.
The " General Regulations" of 1723, provide that, in case of
sickness, death, or necessary absence of the Master, the Senior
Warden acts as Master pro tempore, if no brother be present
who was Master of that lodge before. In the latter case, the
absent Master's authority reverted to the last Master then
present ; though he could not act until the Senior Warden —
or, in his absence, the Junior Warden — had congregated the
lodge.

Subsequently, in this country at least, when the Master was
absent, only a Past Master could confer degrees, though a
Warden might preside over all other transactions. This is
still the rule in several jurisdictions, as may be seen below ;
though some simply require that a Past Master be present at
the time.

The rule, however, that now most generally prevails is, that
in the absence of the Master, the Senior Warden, and, in the
absence of both, the Junior Warden succeeds to all the pow-
ers and privileges of the Master ; and may congregate the
lodge, preside, and confer degrees, the same as the Master
could, if present.

Though there is a show of authority for saying that, in the
absence of the Master and Wardens, a Past Master may open
the lodge, and preside, yet it seems to be the better opinion
that, in such a case, the lodge cannot be opened, except by the
Grand Master or his Deputy.

It is competent for the officer lawfully entitled to preside,
whether Master or Warden, to call to the Chair any master
mason ; and such master mason may then preside, and confer
degrees, and such work will be legal and regular ; the pres-
ence and consent of the one lawfully entitled to preside being
sufficient to establish its legality and regularity.

A Warden can, according to the regulations, preside, and
confer degrees, though he have never taken the degree of
Past Master. — Anderson, G. M Ml, 1855. Grand Lodge do.
4*

82 SUBORDINATE LODGES — WHO MUST PRESIDE.

Each lodge having a provision in its by-laws, giving au«
thority to any Past Master, or any other person, to preside in
the absence of the Master, Senior or Junior Warden, is re-
quired to strike out the same. — Res. 111., 1856.

We think the Senior, and, after him, the Junior Warden,
succeeds to all the duties of the Master in his absence. —
Hatch, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1851 , J. W. S. Mitchell, 1856.

In the absence of the Master, the Senior Warden, and, in
the absence of both, the Junior Warden has the right of pre-
siding. I can find no warrant for the rule that permits a Past
Master to preside in the absence of the Master and both War-
dens. The power of congregating the lodge, in the absence
of the Master, has always been confined to the Wardens ; and
it seems to me that, when both the Master and Wardens are
absent, although a Past Master may be present, the lodge can-
not be opened. — Mackey, P. M. L., 279.

The Senior or Junior Warden succeeds to all the powers,
and performs all the duties of his principal, in his absence,
whether a Past Master is present or not. — Morris, Am. F. 31.,
ii., 97

The Senior Warden, though he has not taken the Past Mas-
ter's degree, can confer degrees in the absence of the Master.
—Wis., 1858.

Brother Mackey considers the decision of the Grand Master
of Illinois (see preceding paragraph) to be very proper, as
the proposition would be a manifest interference with the
constitutional rights of the Wardens, who are entitled, virtute
officii, to preside in the absence of the Master. — S. C, 1855.

Whenever the office of Master of a lodge becomes vacant,
the duties of Master devolve on the Senior Warden ; but if
the Senior Warden declines to preside, on the plea of want of
qualification or other cause, then it is the duty of the Junior
Warden to take the gavel, and preside as Master of the lodge,

SUBORDINATE LODGES — WHO MUST PRESIDE. 83

in presence of the Senior Warden, as well as in his absence.
—Rice, D. G. 31. Ga., 1856.

The usage is well established that the Warden succeeds to
the duties of the Master in his absence. He cannot be super-
seded by a resolution or by-laws of a lodge. He derives his
authority from ancient usage, which cannot be changed by
any regulation of a subordinate lodge. — Gray, C. F. C. oj
Miss., 1852.

The Constitution of Indiana provided that no lodge, in the
absence of the Master, shall initiate, craft, or raise, unless a
Past Master be present presiding. In 1852 the Grand Master
recommended, and a committee approved the recommenda-
tion, that this be stricken out, as being in contravention of
the Ancient Constitutions. The Grand Lodge adopted the
recommendation. — G. W. C.

The Wardens are to perform all the duties of the Master in
his absence.— C. F. C. of N. C, 1851.

It has teen the invariable practice, in this jurisdiction, so
far as we are informed, for the Senior Warden, in the absence
of the Master, to assume the station, and perform all the du-
ties devolving upon the Master, and we see no reason why
the custom should be changed.— C. F. C. of R. L, 1850.

They (Ohio) propose to adopt a rule, that "no lodge, in the
absence of the Master, shall initiate, craft, or raise, unless a
Past Master be present, and presiding." This is unendurable.
Why does the Installation Charge to the Senior Warden tell
him that, " in the absence of the Master, he is to succeed him
in higher duties?" (Craftsman, p. 105,) and "to govern the
lodge." (Preston, p. 88; Cross, p. 74; Webb, p. 99.)

We think the Senior, and, after him, the Junior Warden,
succeeds to all the duties of the Master, in his absence. In
our opinion, they can confer the degrees without calling in a
Past Master.— Hatch, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1850.

We think it no objection to a Warden's acting as Master,
■pro tem.t in conferring degrees, in the absence of the Master,

84 SUBORDINATE LODGES — WHO MUST PEESIDE.

that he has not received a Master's installation, nor the Past
Master's degree in a chapter. — lb.

No mason, below the rank of an installed Master, can ini-
tiate, pass, or raise. — F. M., London, 1837, p. 554. lb.,
1841, p. 128.

A Master cannot resign his chair, unless to a Master or
Past Master.— lb., 1842, p. 470.

Wardens are now allowed to preside, and confer degrees,
in the absence of the Master, and without regard to the pres-
ence of a Past Master. — C. W. Mooke, 1849.

A Senior Warden, who has not taken the Past Master's de-
gree, can confer the degrees in the absence of the Master. —
Wis., 1854.

In the absence of the Master, the Senior and Junior War-
dens, according to rank, succeed to the duties of his station.
— Const. Neb.

The Master and Wardens of lodges are forbidden to invite
any one to preside over their lodges, or confer degrees, who
is not a Present or Past Master. In the absence of the Master
and Wardens, the lodge cannot be opened, except on funeral
occasions, unless by dispensation. In the absence of the
Master, the Wardens succeed to his duties, and may preside,
confer degrees, and transact business, even if they be not
Past Masters. A Master cannot deputize a Past Master to
open the lodge in his absence, to the exclusion of a regular
Warden present. — Regs. Miss.

The Senior Warden has the right to preside in the absence
of the Master, if there are Past Masters present who are act-
ually Past Masters of a lodge. — Brown, Com. Fla., 1854.

In the Grand Lodge of Illinois, 1854, the acting Grand
Master (Anderson) decided a resolution out of order, which
wTas offered to express the opinion that Wardens shall not be
competent to confer any of the degrees of Masonry.

In the absence of the Master, have the Wardens a legal
right to confer the degrees in Masonry? Yes. — Com. La., 1855i

SUBORDINATE LODGES — WnO MUST PRESIDE. 85

The Senior Warden succeeds to and exercises all the pow-.
ers of the Master in his absence. The Junior Warden exer-
cises all the powers of the Master, in the absence of the two
officers above him. — Standard By-Laws of N. Y., 1858.

In case of the death, absence, or inability of the Master, or
a vacancy in his office, the Senior and Junior Wardens will
in succession, succeed to his prerogatives and duties for all
purposes. — Const. N. Y.

In the absence of the Master from any communication of
any lodge, the officer present highest in rank shall preside,
unless, through courtesy, he decline in favor of a past supe-
rior officer. — Const. Ala.

In the absence of the Master, the Senior and Junior War-
dens, according to rank, shall succeed to the duties of his sta-
tion.— Consts. Ohio and Indiana.

It is lawful for a brother, who is not a member of any lodge,
to preside and confer degrees, provided he is a Past Master,
and does so at request of the Master, or, in his absence, the
Senior or Junior Warden present. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

The Senior or Junior Wardens of a lodge have the right to
confer degrees, there being no Past Master present. — lb.

In the absence of the Master, the Senior Warden, and, in
absence of both, the Junior Warden, shall exercise all the
powers of the Master, except conferring degrees, unless he
be a Past Master.— Del, 1858.

Can a Senior or Junior Warden, who has not taken the
degree of Past Master, preside and confer degrees in the
lodge ? We think he cannot. If degrees are to be conferred,
the oldest Past Master, or the Master of another lodge, if
present, should be called upon to preside, when the Warden
is not a Past Master. — Haswell, C. F. C, Vt., 1851.

Is the right of Junior Warden to preside in absence of his
superior officers. May call Past Master to do so if he pleases.
Presiding officer is, de facto, Master for the time being, and
has all the authority of such. — Gedge, G. M. La., 1852.

86 SUBORDINATE LODGES — WHO MUST PRESIDE.

The Senior Warden, and after him the Junior Warden, suc-
ceeds to all the duties of the Master, in his absence. — C. F. C,
N. H., 1852.

The Senior or Junior Warden, when he succeeds to the
chair, has the power -to confer degrees, as the Master might
do if present. — Res. hid., 1858.

No lodge, in the absence of the Master and Wardens, shall
initiate craft, or raise a candidate, unless a Past Master is
present to preside. — Consts. Mass., Maine, Wis., Neb.

No subordinate lodge, in the absence of the Master, snail
initiate, craft, or raise, unless a Tast Master is present. — Const.
N.H.

In the absence of, vacancy in the office, or inability of the
Master, the Senior and Junior Wardens will, in succession,
succeed to his prerogatives and duties, for all purposes. In
the absence of all three of the above-named officers, the lodge
may be opened by one of its Past Masters. — Const. Min.

No lodge shall be opened for the transaction of business in
the absence of the Master and Wardens, unless there be a
Past Master present to preside. — Consts. Mo., Kansas.

A Worshipful Master has no right, on leaving the chair, to
delegate a brother Past Master to it for a series of meetings.
The Senior Warden must by right occupy it, or, in his ab-
sence, the Junior Warden, or, in the absence of both, the old-
est Past Master present. — Morris.

Can a Senior Warden, in the absence of the Master, confer
the Master's degree? Ans. He can. While occupying the
chair, he is, to all intents and purposes, Master. — lb.

. The acts of a meeting duly summoned, but at which neither
Master nor Warden are present, are illegal, and of no effect.
I regard the presence of the Master or a Warden to be as
essential to the forming or opening of a lodge, or the transac-
tion of business therein, as a charter, a Bible, or a square, and
esteem work done in the absence of them as irregular and
^authorized.-- G. M. Ky., 1857.

SUBORDINATE LODGES — WHO MUST PRESIDE. 87

In the absence of the Master and both Wardens, can a lodge
be legally opened? We are of opinion that it cannot; but
there is a show of authority for saying that the last Past Mas
tor of the lodge, or, in his absence, the senior Past Master,
may open it. There is a difference of opinion among masonic
writers upon this latter point, and we can only say that, in
the absence of the Master and both Wardens, it is doubtful
whether a Past Master of the lodge can legally open it ; but
no Master, Past Master, or Wardens of any other lodge, can
legally open it. They have no more authority for doing it,
than they have to open a lodge in any other place they please.
By the charter, the power is granted to the Master and War-
dens only, and if they are absent, we camiot see why it is not
in effect an absence of the charter. Brother Moore, of the
Freemason's Magazine, advises the members " to go home," if
the Master and Wardens are all absent, and look out that at
the next election they elect officers that will attend to their duties.
We think brother Moore is right. — Chase, Mas. Jour., 1855.

No person can occupy the chair in the absence of the Mas-
ter, except one of his "Wardens, or some Past Master. When
a Past Master presides, the lodge must be summoned by the
Master or Senior Warden ; in his absence, or, in the absence
of both, the Junior Warden, under whose authority the Past
Master officiates. — Res. Ala., 1849.

A Master cannot authorize or deputize a Past Master to open
the lodge in his absence, or conduct its labors, to the exclusion
of a regular Warden present, as the Warden succeeds to all
the duties of the Master in his absence. — C. W. Moore.

In the Master's absence, the immediate Past Master, or, if
he be absent, the senior Past Master of the lodge present,
shall take the chair. And if no Past Master of the lodge be
present, then the Senior Warden, or, in his absence, the
Junior Warden shall rule the lodge* — Const. Eng.

* The preceding clause provides that in case the Master shall die, be removed,
or be incapable of discharging the duties of his office, the Senior Warden, the
Junior Warden, the immediate Past Master, or the senior Past Master (in order)
shall act as Master, in summoning the lodge, until the next election of officers. —
G. W. 0

88 SUBORDINATE LODGES — WHO MUST PRESIDE.

In the Master's absence, the immediate Past Master, or, if
he be absent, the senior Past Master of the lodge present-
shall take the chair. If no Past Master of the lodge be pres-
ent, then the Senior Warden, or, in his absence, the Junior
Warden, may rule the lodge, but cannot confer degrees. A
Past Master of any other lodge, present at the meeting of a
lodge, may be invited to officiate as Master, and may confer
egrees, or perform any other ceremony. — Const. Ca.

None but present or Past Masters, or the Wardens of a
lodge, can preside over a lodge. The Warden of another
lodge, as such, cannot. He must be a Past Master. To en-
title any one else than the regular Master or Wardens of a
lodge to preside in it, the lodge must be called together by
the Master, or, in his absence, the Wardens in succession ;
and the chair can only be taken on their invitation. — C. F. C.
of Ga., 1851.

The Master or Warden must himself first open the lodge,
before he can put another person in the chair. It follows, that
a lodge cannot be opened unless one of those officers is pres-
ent, except by the authority of one of the elected Grand of-
ficers in behalf of the Grand Lodge, acting officially in her
name.— C. jP. C. of N. Y., 1852.

If the Master and Wardens are absent, a Past Master may
open the lodge, if he can come legally into possession of the
charter; otherwise, not. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 115.

In the absence of the Master and Wardens, if the Master
leaves the charter in the lodge, or sends it to the lodge, then
the oldest Past Master of that lodge may take it, and go to
work under it. — lb., iii., 49.

In the absence of the Master and Wardens, the lodge can-
not be opened. — Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858. Sandford, G. M.
Ky., 1857.

There can be no Master pro tem. ; no one can open a lodge
but the Master, or, in his absence, the Wardens, or a Past
Master, if he be intrusted with the charter ; but they do so

SUBORDINATE LODGES — WHO MUST PRESJDE. 89

*n their official character, and not as the pro tern, of the Mas-
ter. The brother appointed by the presiding officer, to fill an
office for the time being, is an officer pro tern. — O'Sullivan,
C. F. C, Mo., 1857.

The conduct of the Past Master, (Oregon, 1856,) who, in
the absence of the Master and both Wardens, took the East,
appointed proxies to the "West and South, and proceeded to
open a Master's lodge, &c, was an outrage upon all masonic
authority and order. A lodge cannot be opened without the
presence, at lease, of one of the first three officers to whom
the charter is granted, and who alone are its proper cus-
todians. Past Masters, as Masonry is now regulated, have no
more authority in a lodge than any other of its members, ex-
cept by courtesy. Even under the Old Regulation of 1720,
when it is said " the absent Master's authority reverts to the
last Master then present," it expressly provides, " though he
cannot act until the Senior Warden has once congregated the
lodge, or, in his absence, the Junior Warden." — Brown, C. F.
C. Fla., 1858.

In 1853, the Grand Lodge of the District of Columbia de-
cided, " that no lodge can be opened by any Past Master, un-
less with the consent, and in the presence of some one of the
three principal officers of said lodge, and that such Past Mas-
ter must be one who derives that title from service as Master
of a lodge in this jurisdiction." To this the C. F. C. of N. T.
(King) says: "The principle laid down here, requiring the
presence of one of the first three officers, we regard as
eminently just and sound ; yet, because a Past Master has
served in the chair of a lodge in another jurisdiction, we
should not think him any the less qualified to perform the
duties of the chair. * * * * In the absence of the Mas-
ter, the Senior, and, after him, the Junior Warden, succeeds
to all the duties Of the chair. Without one of these, it is our
opinion, the lodge cannot be opened.

The Grand Master of Louisiana (Perkins, 1856) "fully
agreed ' with the Grand Lodge of D. C.

90 SUBORDINATE LODGES — WHO MUST PRESIDE.

A lodge cannot be opened for business unless at least one
of the first three officers be present. — G. M. La., 1857. La., 1857
The only safe rule. — C. W. Moore.

The opening of a lodge, in the absence of all the officers,
by a Past Master, is irregular. The charter of every lodge
runs to its Master and Wardens and their successors in office.
and no lodge can be rightfully opened when neither of these
officers is present. A Past Master may, at the call of eith<»
one of the said officers present, and entitled to the chair, and
after the latter has congregated the lodge, take the chair, and
open it ; but he does it by no right as a Past Master, but by
the courtesy and fraternal consideration of the officer of the
lodge who thus calls upon him, and who has such right and
privilege.— Frailey, G. M. of D. C, 1855.

When the Master of a lodge is absent, his duty shall be
performed by the Wardens in succession. If they should
likewise be absent, the chair must be taken by a Past Master
of the lodge ; but, if no such Past Master be present, the
lodge cannot be opened. The warrant of constitution is
granted to the Master, Wardens, and their successors in office,
and to none else, and none else can lawfully act. — Const. S. C.

No lodge shall be opened for the transaction of any business
in the absence of the Master and Wardens, unless there be
present a Past Master of the lodge to preside. — Const. Ga.

No lodge can be opened unless by the Master thereof,
either of his Wardens, or some brother who, by service in
the chair, has attained the degree of Past Master. — Const. D. C.

It is highly improper to open a lodge iu the absence of the
Master and both Wardens. — IU.,1856.

If none of the officers be present, nor any Past Master, the
members, according to seniority, shall fill the chair, and shall
have all the rights of an installed Master to fill vacancies. —
Tenn., 1853.

In the absence of the Master, the Senior, and after him the
Junior Warden, succeed to the chair. Without one of these,

SUBORDINATE LODGES — WHO MUST PRESIDE. 91

it is our opinion the lodge cannot be opened. Aftei being
opened by one of these, a Past Master may preside.— King,
C.F.C.ofN.Y.

A Past Master can only preside when the Master or one of
the Wardens is present, and opens the lodge ; after which, ho
may call such a Past Master to the chair. — Pike, Ark.

The Senior Warden succeeds to all the duties of the Master
and fills the chair in his absence. If the Master dies, leaves
the State, or is expelled, the Senior Warden, or, in his absence,
the Junior Warden, shall finMiis place, until the next stated
time of election. * * * * If neither the Master nor
Wardens are present, the oldest Past Master of the lodge
present takes the chair. Should there be no such Past Master
present, the lodge cannot be opened, as none but the Master,
Wardens, and Past Masters, can fill the chair. — Dalcho's Ahi-
man Rezon, 1812.

A lodge cannot do any business or work if the Master and
Wardens are all absent. — J. W. S. Mitchell, 1855.

In case of the absence of the Master and both Wardens, a
lodge must be opened by a brother of the degree of Past
Master. — Conn., 1858.

In the absence of the Master, a Past Master of that lodge,
or, in case of necessity, any other Past Master, may fill the
chair ; but the lodge cannot be opened unless a Master or
Past Master preside. — Const. Ire.

In the absence of the Master and Wardens, a lodge cannot
be opened, unless at the instance of the Grand Master or his
Deputy. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

In the absence of the Master and Wardens of a lodge, if
there be no Past Master present, the lodge cannot be opened,
nor any work done ; neither have the k)dge any power to put
any brother in the chair. — Com. Vt.

92 SUBORDINATE LODGES — ELIGIBILITY TO OFFICE.

Eligibility to Office.

No brother can be elected Master of a lodge unless he has
previously served as a Warden. The only exceptions allowed
are : — In the case of a new lodge, and where, for good reasons,
no one can be found to take the chair who has previously
served as Warden. It is not necessary that the brother should
have served as Warden in that particular lodge, or in that
particular State ; or that such term of service should imme-
diately precede his election to the East. It is sufficient if he
has at any time previous been elected, installed, and served
one term, in either the West or South of a chartered lodge.
Service as Warden pro tempore, or as Warden in a lodge under
dispensation, is not sufficient to constitute eligibility.

Any master mason, in good standing, and a member of the
lodge, is eligible to any office in the lodge, except that of
Master. No brother, below the degree of master mason, can
be elected or appointed to any office in a lodge. With the
exception of Tiler, (who may be a member of any other lodge,
but must be a member of some lodge,) a brother can only hold
office in the lodge of which he is at the time a member.

No brother can be a Warden until he has passed the part
of a fellow-craft ; nor a Master, until he has acted as a War-
den ; nor Grand Warden, until he has been Master of a lodge.
— Ancient Charges, IV.

No brother is eligible to the office of Master of a lodge who
has not served acceptably as a Warden in some regularly-
constituted lodge, under the jurisdiction of this or some other
Grand Lodge, at least six months, except where a new lodge
is to be formed, or where no such Warden can be found. —
Const. N. H.

No brother ought to be elected Master of a lodge who has
not served, at least one year, in the office of Warden. — Const.
Mass., Wis.

No member can be Master of a lodge unless he has previ-
ously been installed, and served as an elected Warden fo?

SUBORDINATE LODGES — ELIGIBILITY TO OFFICE. 93

one year, except at the institution of a new lodge, when no
Warden or Past Master is found to serve as Master .-.-Const.
of N. Y.

No brother can be elected Master of a lodge who has not
been elected and served as Warden of a lodge in this juris-
diction, except in extraordinary cases, or at the formation of
a new lodge, when no Past Warden, who is willing and qual-
ified to act as Master, is to be found among the members. — ■
Const. Penn.

No lodge shall elect any member as its Master, except War-
dens or Past Masters. — Const. Fla.

No brother shall be eligible to the Mastership unless he
has been elected and served in the station of Warden in some
regular lodge. — Const. Ohio.

No brother shall be eligible to the office of Master of a
lodge unless he shall previously have been a Warden of a
regular lodge, except in case of the formation of a new lodge,
when no past or former Warden can be found among its mem-
bers.— Const. Mich.

No one can be Master of a warranted lodge (except at its
first election) but a master mason, who shall have served as
a Warden. — Const. Min.

The Ancient Regulations, requiring the Master to have served
as Warden, shall be strictly enforced under this jurisdiction.
— Const. Iowa.

No lodge shall elect for its Master any other than a War-
den, Past Warden, or Past Master, who has served six months
at least as such, unless from some cause the lodge should not
contain members so qualified. — Const. Md.

The service of one year as a Warden, required to make a
brother eligible as Master, need not have been performed in
the lodge over which he is chosen as Master.* — Iewis, G. M.
of Cf. Y., 1858.

* The case of the compiler is in point. Previous service in another lodge as
Warden, was considered sufficient by three Past Gra>t> Masters, members of the
lodge.— G. W. C.

94 SUBORDINATE LODGES — ELIGIBILITY TO OFFICE.

I am clearly of opinion that, as a matter of policy, we t light
not to permit the installation of a brother as Master, until he
has served as Warden. Your past action having indicated
approbation of such a proceeding, I have myself installed, as
Masters, two who never filled, under an election, the office of
Warden.— Peekins, G. M. La., 1856.

The principle that a necessary qualification of a Master of a
lodge is, that he must have previously served in the office of
a Warden, is hereby approved by this Grand Lodge. — Res.
La., 1857.

No brother shall be eligible to the Mastership, unless he has
been elected, and served in the station of Warden, in some
regular lodge. — Const. Neb.

None but those who have served one year as a Warden of
a lodge under this jurisdiction, are eligible to the office of
Master, except in the case of a new lodge. — Reg. Miss.

Such master having regularly served as Warden of a war-
ranted lodge for one year. — Const. Eng.

No brother can be Master until he has acted as Warden in
some regular lodge. — Tenn., 1856; La., 1857. As a general
proposition this is the opinion we entertain. — McCorkle
C. F. C. Ky., 1857.

No brother is eligible to the office of Master, except he has
been elected and installed as a Warden of a regular lodge. —
Hubbard, Ohio, 1852. Com. Juris, do. Grand Lodge do.

It is unmasonic to elect to the oriental chair any one who has
not previously served the proper time as Warden. — .Mm., 1855.

A brother must have been elected and installed, before he
can be recognized as the regular Warden of a lodge. Though
a brother has served a full term as Warden pro tern., he is not
eligible to the office of Master. — Hartsock, G. M. Iowa, 1859^

The true doctrine is, that no mason should be elected Mas-
ter of a lodge until " he has acted as a Warden," unless in
extreme cases, and then only by authority ?f the Grand
Lodge.— O'Sullivan, C. F. C. Mo., 1858.

SUBORDINATE LODGES — HOLDING MORE THAN ONE OFFICE. 95

A member cannot be elected as Master, unless he has pre-
viously served as a Warden, except in a new lodge or other
ease of emergency. — Mackey, P. M. L., 102.

On general principles, as well as ancient usage and the gen-
eral spirit of Masonry, no one should be considered eligible to
be elected Master of a lodge, until he has been elected to and
served in the office of Warden. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev., xiv., 321.

No brother can be elected or appointed an officer of a sub-
ordinate lodge, unless he be a member of such lodge, except
the Tiler, who shall, however, be a member of some lodge. —
Const. N. H.

Full membership in a lodge is necessary to constitute eligi-
bility to office in a Grand or Subordinate lodge. — Const. N. Y.

No brother can be elected an officer of a lodge until he has
been three years a master mason. — Grand Lodge Hanover.

No brother shall be eligible to hold the office of Master of
a lodge for a longer period than two years in succession, nor
shall he be re-elected, at any time afterwards, until at least one
year from the expiration of his former Mastership. — Consts.
England, Ireland.

Every brother who has received the said three orders of
Masonry, (E. A., F. C, and M. M.,) and who is not otherwise
disqualified, is competent to be put in nomination for, and to
be elected to the Mastership, or any other office in a lodge. —
Const. Scotland.

A master mason, not a member, is not eligible to the office
of Master or Warden in a lodge. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1852.

Any master mason in good standing is eligible to any office
in the subordinate lodge of which he is a member. — Res.
Oregon, 1858.

Holding more than one Office.

As a general rule, it may be considered irregular for a
brother to hold more than one office in a lodge (Grand or Sub-
ordinated at the same time. It is also well settled that a

96 SUBORDINATE LODGES — HOLDING MORE THAN ONE OFFICE.

brother cannot hold the office of Master or Warden of a sub-
ordinate lodge, and that of Grand Master, Deputy Grand
Master, Grand Warden, or District Deputy Grand Master, at
the same time. To the latter rule there are a few exceptions,
as will be seen below.

As a brother cannot be a member of more than one lodge,
at the same time, and as membership is necessary to consti-
tute eligibility to any office, except that of a Tiler, it follows
that a brother cannot hold office in more than one lodge at the
same time, with the above exception. In jurisdictions where
petitioners for a dispensation for a new lodge are not required
to file a demit from their old lodge with such petition, there
is a seeming regularity in a brother's holding an office in both ;
but its propriety, if not its correctness, may well be questioned.

The following constitutions contain provisions, in substance
as in the first paragraph above: Maine, New Hampshire,
Massachusetts, and New Jersey.

Election to an office in the Grand Lodge shall be no cause
of disqualification from holding an office in a subordinate
lodge. — Const. Va.

Nor shall any brother be an officer in more than one lodge
at the same time, unless by special permission of Grand
Lodge/ — Const. Ire.

No brother shall be Master of more than one lodge at the
same time, without a dispensation from the Grand Master. —
Const. Eng.

We are of opinion that if an officer in a chartered lodge be
appointed an officer in a lodge under dispensation, he can
legally pef form both offices at one and the same time. — Mor.
ris, Am. F. M., iii., 180.

The constitutions do not prevent a member of a lodge from
holding the offices of Treasurer and Warden or Deacon, in the
same lodge. — F. 31., London Qu. 1840-54.

In Wisconsin, the Grand Master and Deputy Grand Master
cannot at the same time be Master or Warden of a subordi
nate lodge.

SUBORDINATE LODGES — OFFICERS MUST RE INSTALLED. 97

In Minnesota, the Grand Master cannot at the 6ame time
be Master of a subordinate lodge.

In Maryland, a Master or Warden of a subordinate lodge
cannot at the same time hold any office in Grand Lodge ; and
no brother can fill more than one Grand office at the same time.

It is unmasonic for a Subordinate or a Grand Lodge to elect
a brother to office, while he continues a member of, or an of-
ficer in, another Subordinate or Grand Lodge. — C. F. C. of R
L, 1850.

Officers cannot act as such until Installed.

An elected officer cannot act, as such, until he has been reg-
ularly installed into his office. In the absence of particular
or local regulations, we do not deem it essential that appointed
officers be at any time installed. Such was the oldest usage
in New England, and is the present usage in, at least, this
jurisdiction.

No officer of the Grand Lodge, or of any subordinate lodge,
shall act as such until he is duly installed. — Const. Vt.

No elected officer of the Grand Lodge, or of any subordi-
nate lodge, shall act as such until he is duly installed. — Consts.
R. L, Me., Wis.

In Massachusetts, the rule is the same as in Maine.

No officer shall enter upon his duties until he has been reg-
ularly installed.— Const. Fla. and Const. Penn.

No brother, either of the Grand Lodge or of a private
■odge, can be recognized as an officer until after he is in-
stalled.— Const. S. C.

No Grand officer shall officiate in the station to which he is
elected, until he has been legally installed. — Const. Ind.

No elected officer of the Grand Lodge, or of any private
lodge, shall act as such until he is duly installed. — Const. Ky.

Any lodge that shall receive a charter, shall have their of-
ficers regularly installed before they proceed to work under
the charter. — lb.

98 SUBORDINATE LODGES — RE-INSTALLATION.

Officers elect cannot do any business, as such, until they
are installed. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

Officers elect cannot act until installed. — Swigert, G. M
Ky., 1858.

No brother shall be allowed to perform the duties of any
office to which he is elected, until he has been duly installed.
—Res. R. L, 1858.

No officer can permanently take possession of the office to
which he has been elected, until he has been duly installed. —
Mackey, P. M. L., 104.

In 1827, a committee of the Grand Lodge of Maine reported
that, as the installation of the subordinate officers of a lodge
was " merely ceremonial," while in the case of a Master of >
lodge the installation is " absolutely essential ;" ergo, subor-
dinate officers may enter upon the duties of the office to which
they have been elected, or appointed, before they are installed,
while a Master elect cannot do so. [Report accepted]

No Master elect shall assume the Master's chair until he
snail have been regularly installed, though he may in the in
terim rule the lodge. — Const. Eng.

Irregularity, or Failure to Install Officers, not Fatal. —
I can hardly admit that a Grand body, masonically legal, is, in
effect, destroyed by an error in the installation of its Grand
officers; nor is it to be admitted that such would even be
the result, if the Grand officers were not installed at all. No
such consequence naturally or necessarily follows, and we are
not aware of any positive law which thus declares, ancient or
modern.— Tucker, G. M. Vt., 1852.

Re-installation.

As an officer holds his office until his successor is elected
and installed, and as one can hardly be said to be his own
successor, if re-elected, we are of opinion that a re-installation
is unnecessary, unless one or more terms intervene between
the present and the former election. The quite common
usage, however, is to install as often as re-elected, though the
practice, is not universal.

SUBORDINATE LODGES — INSTALLING BY PROXY. 99

A Master re-elected, must be re-installed. — Hubbard > G. M.
Ohio, 1851. F. M. Kino, 1853. G. 31. of R. 1., 1856.

If the present Master is re-elected, lie needs no more install-
ation. Re-installation is unnecessary. If one or more terms
intervene, he must be re-inducted. — Gedge, G. M. La., 1852.
N. Y.

It has been supposed that when the Master of a lodge has
been once regularly installed, he need not, upon a second
election, be installed again. — English, C. F. C. Ark, 1857.

If re-elected, a re-installation is unnecessary and superflu-
ous, though not illegal. — Morris, Am. F.' 31., v., 92.

An officer re-elected to the office in which he has just
served one or more terms, need not be re-installed therein. —
Standard By-laws Ky., 1854.

The practice is common to re-install, but I consider it
wholly unnecessary. — J. W. S. Mitchell, 1855.

A re-installation is necessary if a term or terms has inter-
vened; not otherwise. — Lawrence, Sig. and Jour., 1856.

Installing Officers by Proxy.

Although the practice of installing officers by proxy has
the authority of common custom for its support, it may well
be doubted whether it is consistent with the principles which
are acknowledged to lie at the foundation of Masonic Law
and Jurisprudence. The arguments relied upon to support
the practice, are equally legitimate when applied to conferring
degrees by proxy. It is, therefore, a subject of congratulation
that the practice is slowly, but surely, becoming obsolete.

In case the Grand Master elect be absent at the time of
installation, he may be installed by proxy ; and such proxy
must be a Past Grand Master, or the senior Past Master pres-
ent All Grand officers, elected or appointed,

shall (if present, or, if not present, by some brother as their
proxy,) be installed into office. — Const. Me.

Absent officers may be installed by proxy. — Const. N. H.

100 SUBORDINATE LODGES — INSTALLING BY PROXY.

In case the Grand Master elect cannot attend at the time
appointed for his installation, he may be installed by proxy,
on signifying his acceptance of the office ; but such proxy
must be a Past Grand Master, or the senior Past Master pres-
ent. The Grand Master, if present, shall install the elective
officers and his Deputy. If absent, his proxy shall install the
Deputy Grand Master, who shall install the remaining officers.
The appointed officers may be installed by the Deputy Grand
Master. In case of the absence of the Deputy Grand Master,
either of the Grand Wardens, the Grand Treasurer, or Record-
ing Grand Secretary, they may be installed by proxies, who
shall be Past officers of corresponding rank, or Past Masters
of subordinate lodges, and members of the Grand Lodge.
The proxies of all other officers, except Grand Chaplain and
Tiler, must also be members of the Grand Lodge. — Const. Mass.

In cases of sickness or necessary absence, the Grand Mas-
ter, or any other Grand officer, may be invested by proxy. —
Const. R. 1.

In New Jersey, the Grand Master alone can be installed by
proxy, who must be a Past Grand Master, or a Past Master
of very ancient and respectable standing.

In case of sickness or necessary absence, the Grand Master,
or any other Grand officer, may be installed by proxy ; but
whoever represents them must have sustained the office to
which such absent officer is to be installed, or such office as
might have entitled him to fill the chair in the absence of the
Grand Master. — Const. N. C.

In case the Grand Master elect cannot attend at the time
appointed, he may be installed by proxy — such proxy being
a Past Grand Master, or Past Deputy Grand Master. — Const.
B.C.

If any officer, elected or appointed, be absent at the general
installation, the Grand Master shall appoint some suitable
brother to install him at some other time and place — a report
of which shall be made to the Grand Secretary. — lb.

SUBORDINATE LODGES — INSTALLING BY rROXY. 101

In Wisconsin, any officer of the Grand Lodge may be in-
stalled by proxy. The proxy must be a Past officer of cor
responding rank, or a Past Master, and a member of the Grand
Lodge. The proxies for the subordinate offices, except Grand
Chaplain and Tiler, may, however, be simply members of the
Grand Lodge.

In Maryland, the Grand Master elect may be installed by
proxy, on signifying his acceptance of the office, and his de-
sire to be so installed ; but if any of the other Grand officers
elect be absent, " the Grand Lodge shall appoint a time for
their installation."

A regulation which seems to us to be of very doubtful pro-
priety.— C. F. C. N. H., 1849.

The practice of installing officers by proxy is fraught with
evils of no ordinary magnitude. — G. M. of Mo., 1848.

Ordered, That the Grand officers appointed for the ensuing
year, who are not present at this communication, be installed
in the several lodges of which they are members, and that
they furnish certificates thereof to the Grand Secretary as
soon as may be convenient. [Passed.']

The above virtually denies the correctness of installing " by
proxy ;" and we are pleased to see that so respectable a Grand
Lodge as that of Maine has come out squarely against the
unreasonable practice. — Mas. Jour., 1857.

The Master of Lodge was installed by proxy, as I was

informed. I unhesitatingly decided such installation a nulli-
ty.—Rockwell, D. G. M. Ga., 1851.

In this State, a Master may be, and sometimes is, installed
by proxy : that is to say, if elected when absent or sick. —
Hatch, C. F. C. of N. Y, 1852.

An installation by proxy of a Warden is regular, but it is
recommended that it be not followed hereafter. — Lewis, G. M.
of N. Y., 1858.

Hereafter, the Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master, and

102 SUBORDINATE LODGES--WHO CAN INSTALL.

Masters of subordinate lodges, in no case, shall be installed
by proxy. — Res. Fla., 1857.

It has ever seemed, wrong to us to install by proxy. — F. M.
King, 1851.

A brother installed by proxy is no more bound to fulfill
the pledges of his proxy, than a man is bound to pay a note
signed for him by another party. — Morris.

A feeble view of the duties of a Master or Wardens must
that lodge have, that will install its officers by proxy. — Com.
R. L, 1858.

No officer under the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge shall
be installed by proxy. — Res. R. L, 1858.

The practice is wrong — decidedly wrong. — C. Moore, Mas.
Rev., vii., 169.

"Who Can Install.

The officers of a subordinate lodge can only be installed by
a Past Master. After a Master has been installed, he has the
right to install his subordinate officers.

Any Past Master, if regularly invited, may install the of-
ficers elect of a lodge, whether he be a member of that lodge
or not.— Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

After the newly-elected Master of a constituted lodge is
installed, he has the right to install his officers. — J. W. S.
Mitchell, 1855.

The right and authority to install resides in the consti-
tuting power (Grand Lodge), represented by the Grand Master
or his Deputy. When a lodge is constituted, it is invested
with power of succession, of which election and installation
is part. The power of election is in the lodge, and of installa-
tion in the presiding officer, by authority conferred by charter.
It is the right and duty of the presiding officer to install the
officers elect. He has the right, because he is the presiding
officer, and for no other reason. The Grand Lodge delegated
the authority to the office, and not the individual. Whoever

SUBORDINATE LODGES — WHO CAN INSTALL. 103

fills the office of Master at the time of a certain act, is author-
ized to perforin it, whether he be actual Master or filling the
office pro tern., per reason of authority vested in the office.
The Presiding Master must be a Past Master by office ; other-
wise he cannot qualify the Master elect. No Past Master has
an inherent right to install. In the absence of the Grand
Master, his Deputy or Proxy, or actual Master of the lodge,
the right and duty of installing the Master elect is vested in
the brother who fills the Master's chair at the time the cere-
mony is to be performed. — Gedge, G. M. La., 1852.

The Senior Warden has the right to preside in the absence
of the Master, but is not competent to install the Master elect,
(unless he is Past Master by office,) and must call a Past Master
(by office) to the chair for the occasion. — lb.

The right of succession authorizes a Past Master of the
lodge to install. If there be none but the one to be installed,
there is no impropriety in his calling a Past Master of some
other lodge, or in the Warden's doing it; but the latter can-
not himself install a Master. — F. M. King, 1853.

We understand that there is no general, fixed, and acknowl-
edged rule of masonic law, as to what officers have the power
to install, either the officers of a Grand Lodge or those of a
secular lodge. The subject is usually regulated by State Con-
stitutions, regulations, or by-laws, according to the peculiar
circumstances in which a State finds itself placed. — Tucker,
G. M. Vt., 1851.

Has a mere Warden or Past Warden authority to install a
Master elect of a lodge, new or old? and can any by-law of a
lodge authorize it? We think not. The installing officer must
have been a Master.— Hatch, C. F. C. of N. F.,1851.

After the officers of a lodge have been once duly installed,
any Past Master may install their successors, without a proxy

from the Grand Master Hubbard, Ohio, 1852. Com. Juris.,

do. Grand Lodge do.

The old Master of a lodge, so presiding, has the right to
install the newly-elected Master. Then it is the prerogative

104 SUBORDINATE LODGES — RESIGNING OFFICE.

of the newly-installed Master to install the other officers of
his lodge ; though he may waive the exercise of that preroga-
tive, and request his predecessor or any Past Master to do it,
— Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

It is usual for the retiring Master to install his successor
Any Past Master may perform that ceremony. — Anderson
G. M. Ill, 1855. Grand Lodge do.

Tenure of Office.

An officer in a Grand or Subordinate lodge, when duly in-
stalled, holds his office until his successor is installed. This
is distinctly declared in the following Grand Lodge Constitu-
tions : —Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Isl-
and, New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Georgia,
Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin,
Mississippi, Missouri, Texas, California, Oregon, Kansas.
and Canada.

If an election was not had at the proper time, the officers
last in office will continue to act. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

Installed officers act until others are constitutionally elected
and installed— Swigert, G M. Ky., 1858.

The rule of the craft is, that the old officer holds on until
his successor is installed ; and this rule applies to officers of
every grade. — Mackey, P. M. L., 104.

Resigning Office.

After a brother has been installed into an office, he cannot
resign such office during the term for which he was elected,
or appointed. A brother may be demitied during his term of
office, (for the purpose of removing out of the jurisdiction, or
other good cause,) and thus his office become vacant, but it is
generally held that he cannot resign. An office may be va-
cated by death, or removal from the jurisdiction, but not by
resignation.

The principal officers, elected and installed, cannot and
should not resign. — Hubbard, G. M. Ohio, 1851.

SUBORDINATE LODGES RESIGNING OFFICE. JQ5

No officer can resign his office after he has been installed. —
Mackey, P. M. L., 120.

The Master and Wardens of every warranted lodge, if in-
stalled, cannot resign. — Const. N. Y

No officer can resign his office after he is installed. — Const.
S. C.

You cannot resign during your year of office. — Ed. Lon. F.
31. Mag., 1858.

The Wardens or officers of a lodge cannot resign their of-
fices unless for a cause which appears to the lodge to be
sufficient. — Const. Ca.

In Kentucky, the doctrine has always been that the Master
of a lodge cannot resign his office, or demit from the lodge of
which he is the Master, until his successor is duly elected and
installed. — Morris.

It is not competent for a Warden to resign during his term
of office. — Com. Juris., Ohio, 1857.

It is an established law in Pennsylvania, that neither the
Master nor Wardens of a lodge can resign during the term
for which they were elected. — Min. and Ky., 1857.

Neither the Master nor Wardens, when once installed, can
resign their stations. If the Master dies, is absent, or re-
moves, the Wardens succeed to the duties until the regular
time of election, if the absence be permanent ; but, if a War-
den's station is made vacant by death or removal, a dispensa-
tion may issue to authorize an election. — Rockwell, D. G. 31.
Ga., 1851.

We think he (Rockwell) is right in his decision. — Hatch,
C.F. C.o/N. Y., 1852.

Neither of the first three officers of a subordinate lodge can
resign during the term for which they were elected. — Res. 111.,
1854 We cordially assent to the principle. — C. F. C. Texas,
1855. In accordance with what we have been taught. — Bar-
ber, C. F. C. Ark., 1856.
5*

106 SUBORDINATE LODGES — RESIGNING OFFICE.

Being made Master of a lodge ought not to deprive a Mas-
ter of any of those rights which he enjoyed as a mason, among
which is the right to change his location ; to remove from the
jurisdiction of one lodge to that of another ; and with his
change of location to change his membership, which can only
be done by demitting from the lodge of which he is a mem
ber.— Ind., 1856.

Masters or Wardens cannot make a vacancy in their offices
by resigning before the close of their constitutional term, or
by demitting to join another warranted lodge in the jurisdic-
tion.—Lewis, G. M. ofN. Y., 1858.

We do not deny the right of a Master of a subordinate
lodge, or a Grand Master either, to change his location. And
on such change we would not withhold from him his demit.
Although the word resign is found in the Regulations of the
Grand Lodge of England, we prefer the doctrine of this Grand
Lodge, that a Master cannot resign. The Old Regulations
provide that in case he die, &c, the Senior Warden shall fill
his place until the next election. This itself implies that the
power of the Master elect is continued in the person of the
Senior Warden. But to resign implies the putting off his
power, so as to render necessary a new election. It destroys
or annuls this power for the time, while in the other cases his
power is continued — kept alive in the person of the Senior
Warden.— Lawrence, C. F. C. Ga., 1856.

The Grand Lodge of Indiana, (1855,) in adopting a report,
affirmed that a Master of a subordinate lodge could not demit.

The Committee of Maryland (C. F. C, 1855) deny the right
of Grand officers to resign. To this Mellen (C. C. F. Miss.,
j.856) says: "This is not a landmark, and the history of Ma-
sonry shows many resignations. It is a matter open to reg-
ulation in each jurisdiction. Our constitution expressly forbids
the resignation of officers of subordinate lodges. We think
it has been generally understood that the Grand officers could
not, but we are inclined to a different opinion."

No officer of any subordinate lodge shall resign his office

SUBORDINATE LODGES — RESIGNING OFFICE. 10

or demit during the period for which he shall have been
elected and installed. — Const. Miss.

No officer can resign his office after he is installed. — Dalciio.
Mackey, P. 31. L., 120.

I cannot see how such resignation could be permitted, if
the ceremony of installation is properly performed. — Mackey.

If an officer cannot resign his office after his election, we do
not see how he can resign his membership during his term
of office ; for the latter would necessarily carry with it a res-
ignation in the former. * * * We are not acquainted
with any ancient rule or usage, of general application, that
denies the right of a member to demit from the lodge, or to
resign his place as an officer. * * * Where, by a rule of
the Grand Lodge, or of the by-laws of the lodge, an officer is
denied the right to resign his place before the expiration of
his official term, he cannot evade the obligation of the rule by
the resignation of his membership. But where no such rule
exists, he may resign his office, or his membership, or both.
The general requirements of the order having been complied
with.— C. W. Moore.

The opinion that officers cannot resign is an erroneous one.
It is a question of local law, and not a landmark nor ancient
usage. — Mellen, Acacia, 1856.

The Master of a subordinate lodge cannot resign his office.
The principal officers, elected and installed, cannot and should
not resign. In case of a desire to remove to a foreign coun-
try, it would be proper for a Master or Warden to demit
during his term of office. Resignation of installed officers
is unmasonic. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

The Master or Wardens of a lodge, in case of their perma-
nent removal from the jurisdiction, are entitled to a demit. —
Res. Mich., 1859.

There is no provision for allowing the resignation of any
officer ; but they shall remain in office until their successors
shall be duly elected. — La., 1855. This, we believe, is the
settled law upon the subject. — Bierce C. F. C. Ohio.

108 SUBORDINATE LODGES — VACANCIES IN OFFICE.

The Master of a subordinate lodge has the right to resign
or demit. — Res. Ind., 1856 We dissent from the doctrine. —
Barber, C. F. C, Ark., 1856.

A lodge has not the power to demit its Master. — Iowa, 1858.

The writer, while Master of a lodge, (among whose mem-
bers were three Past Grand Masters,) was demitted before the
expiration of his official term. — G. W. C, 1857.

Incorrect to grant the Master a demit. — Ky., 1857.

In this jurisdiction the doctrine has always been, that the
Master of a lodge cannot resign his office, or demit from the
lodge of which he is the Master, until his successor is duly
elected and installed. — McCorkle, C. F. C. Ky., 1857.

No officer can resign or demit during his term of office.—
Ark, 1853.

We do not know of any thing to forbid a lodge from demit-
ting one of its officers, unless its Grand Lodge has forbidden
it by edict. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 66.

No officer, duly elected and installed, can resign his office
during the term thereof, save by demitting. — Standing By-
Laws Ky., 1854.

An officer duly elected and installed cannot resign. — Mor-
ris, Am. F. M., iv., 45.

We believe that a Master can resign his office, or demit. —
C. Moore, Mas. Rev., xv., 186.

Vacancies in Office.
An office may be vacated by death, permanent removal
from the jurisdiction, or expulsion. In case of a vacancy in
the office of Master, the Senior Warden succeeds to the chair,
and fills the West by pro tern, appointments. If both offices
be vacated, the Junior Warden succeeds to the chair, and fills
the West and South by pro tern, appointments. If the first
three offices should all be vacated, the Grand Master, or Grand
Lodge, may issue a dispensation for a new election ; but, in
our opinion, no such new election can be had so long as on©

SUBORDINATE LODGES — VACANCIES IN OFFICE. 109

of the Wardens remain to fill the chair. A vacancy in any
other elective office, except that of Master, may be filled at
any time by a dispensation for that purpose, and in no other
way, until the next stated -time of election. Vacancies in ap-
pointed offices may be filled at any time by the appointing
power.

On the death, resignation, or removal from the common-
wealth, of any elective Grand officer, the Grand Lodge may be
convened for the purpose of filling the vacancy by election. —
Const. Penn.

In case of the death of the Master and Wardens, or their
removal from the jurisdiction, the Grand Master may, by dis-
pensation, permit a special election, to fill their places until
the next stated election. — Ibid.

If the Master and both Wardens should die, be expelled, or
leave the city or state, not to return, a new election can be
held under a dispensation from the presiding Grand officer. But
if either of them remain, no election can be held. — Const. S. C.

A vacancy in any other office than that of Master, may be
filled at any regular communication after its occurrence'; but
no election for Master can be held at any other time than at
the annual stated period, except in case of death, expulsion,
or removal from the jurisdiction of the Master, and a vacancy
in the office of the two Wardens, when the Grand Master may
issue a dispensation for a special election for all said officers.
— Const. D. C.

A lodge may fill vacancies in office, except those of Master
and Wardens, by ballot, at any stated communication, upon
full notice to the members ; but in case of vacancy in the of-
fice of Master, an election can only be held by virtue of a dis-
pensation from the Grand Master. — Const. N. Y.

A lodge may fill vacancies in office, except those of Master
and Wardens, (as their by-laws may prescribe,) at any stated
communication, upon full notice to the members. — Const. Minn.

Vacancies in all the offices of a lodge, except the Master and

110 SUBORDINATE LODGES — VACANCIES IN OFFICE.

Wardens, can at any time be filled in the usual manner. r—Res.
III., 1853.

In 1853, the Grand Lodge of California, by resolution, ap-
pointed a brother Senior Warden of a subordinate lodge to
fill a vacancy occasioned by death. This the C. F. C. of N. Y.,
1854, (King,) considered proper.

Every vacancy (in subordinate lodges) shall be filled by
appointment pro tern., until the regular period of election. —
Const. Miss.

When the Master of a lodge dies or resigns, or the office
becomes otherwise vacant from any cause, the lodge may
apply for a dispensation to hold an election to fill the vacancy,
if, in the judgment of the officer to whom the application is
made, an election is necessary. But a vacancy in the stations
of Senior or Junior Wardens shall be filled temporarily
by appointment by the Master or presiding officer of the
lodge. — Const. Ga.

Vacancies in all the offices of a lodge, except the Master
and Wardens, can at any time be filled in the usual manner. —
Reg. III.

The lodge having at its annual meeting chosen a Master
wno proved to be ineligible, I granted them a dispensation
for the election of a Master, and for filling any vacancies
created by such an election. — Sherburne, G. M. Minn., 1856.

The opinion that a lodge can fill a vacancy in the office of
Master or Wardens, at any time between their elections, other
than pro tern., we think wrong. — Com. R. L, 1858.

A vacancy occurring in the offices of Master or Wardens
cannot be filled, except at the time of the annual election, or
by a dispensation from the Grand Lodge.— Res. R. I., 1858.

When vacancies occur in any of the elective offices of a
lodge, they must be filled by seniority, or pro tern, appoint-
ments during the remainder of the term ; and no election can
be held to fill them.— Ark., 1852.

In case of the death or removal of the Master, or either of

SUBORDINATE LODGES — VACANCIES IN OFFICE. HI

tho Wardens, no election can be held to supply the vacancy,
even by dispensation. Vacancies in any of the subordinate
offices i lay be filled by a dispensation from the Grand Master
to hold in election for that purpose. — Mackey, P. M. L., 120.

WhL.., a companion was elected High Priest of his chap-
ter, while he was absent, and declined accepting, held, that it
did not fall under the rule of succession, that the scribe could
not fill the office, and that the chapter, ex necessitate rei, not-
withstanding any by-law, was authorized to fill the vacancy
by election, and without dispensation. — C. W. Moore.

The Junior Warden remains in the South, except in the ab-
sence of the Master and Senior Warden, when he takes the
East. There is nothing said at his installation about his
taking the West. — Hartsock, G. M. loiva., 1859.

An office can be vacated only by death, permanent removal
from the jurisdiction, or expulsion. Suspension does not va-
cate, but only suspends the performance of the duties of the
office.— Mackey, P. M. L., 120.

When the Senior Warden succeeds to the chair, the Junior
Warden does not succeed to the West. — lb., 127.

While any of the three to whom the warrant of constitution
has been entrusted, remains, no election can be held to fill a
vacancy. — Mackey, Mas. Mis. ii., 271.

Vacancies in all other than elective offices may be filled by
the Master, as occasion may require. — C. W. Moore, 1849.

An office once vacated, can only be filled in the way and
manner provided by the regulations of the body. An officer
cannot resign and accept his jewel at pleasure. A legal ex-
pulsion vacates the office. — C. W. Moore.

Upon the removal or death of the Master, the Senior War-
den succeeds to his official powers and duties ; next, (in their
absence,) the Junior Warden. If a vacancy happens in all
these offices by death or removal, the last Master and mem-
ber of the lodge may officiate pro tern., appointing a Junior and
Senior Warden pro tern. If that cannot be done, the Grand

112 SUBORDINATE LODGES — ELECTIONS.

Master may appoint a suitable Past Master for Master, and
brethren for Senior and Junior Wardens, with power to act
accordingly. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

Elections.

When. — Elections can only be held at the time prescribed
by the Constitution or the By-laws. For good cause shown,
a Grand Master may, by common usage, permit a lodge to
hold an election at some other time than that prescribed as
above. A dispensation may also be granted to fill a vacancy
in any elective office, except that of Master. [See preceding
section.]

When elections are not complete, and, from some emergent
cause, it may become necessary to postpone the work, the
Master may, in his discretion, call the craft from labor, until a
given period, to finish the work. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

No election of officers can take place at any other time than
that prescribed by the Grand Constitutions, or by the by-laws
of the lodge.— C. W. Moore, 1849.

If any lodge shall fail to elect its officers at the time desig-
nated in the by-laws, the members will apply to the Grand
Master for a dispensation to continue their work ; or, if they
wish no delay or suspension in their business, the lodge can,
by a unanimous vote, request the old officers to retain their
stations, and hold over and work, until the next annual elec-
tion.—Bain, of N. C, 1858.

No election can be held, except at the constitutional meet-
ing for that purpose. — Dalcho.

When the election for the officers of a lodge is held at a
different time from that prescribed by the Constitution of the
Grand Lodge, the election is null and void, and the persons
elected cannot be installed. — Rice, D. G. M. Ga., 1856. Abell,
C. F. C. CaL, 1858.

Where a Master resigned his office, and the lodge proceeded
to elect the Junior Warden to the East, and a member to the
South, and install them, it was held that such election was

SUBORDINATE LODGES — ELECTIONS. 113

illegal, and the officers above named were refused scats ii the
Grand Lodge. — La., 1856.

The regular election of the officers of a lodge must be held
at the time specified by the Constitntion. — Hubbard, Ohio,
1853.

If an election was not had at the proper time, the officers
last in office will continue to act. — lb.

No election can be had to fill the vacancy occasioned by
the death or removal of the Master, until the regular time
provided by the by-laws. — lb.

Elections must be held while the lodge is at labor, and not
when at refreshment. — Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

No election can be held for the officers of a lodge, except
at the regular time specified in the by-laws. — Tenn., 1856.

No election for Master of a lodge can be held at any other
time than the period of the annual election. — Res. D. C,
1849. Correct constitutional doctrine. — Parvin, C. F. C.
Iowa, 1850.

A lodge failing to elect and install their officers at the proper
time, must apply to the Grand Master, or to the District Dep-
uty Grand Master, for authority to do so at some subsequent
time.— Smith, G. M. Ark., 1856.

Lodges are bound to elect their officers at the prescribed
time ; nor can they anticipate or postpone it, unless by dis-
pensation from the Grand Master. — Mackey, P. M.L., 112.

"What Majority is Necessary to Elect. — The general usage
seems to be, that a majority of all the ballots or votes are suf-
ficient to elect to any office in a Grand or Subordinate lodge.
In the election of Grand Lodge officers, the only exceptions
are in the following jurisdictions :

In Maine and Massachusetts, two-thirds of all the votes col-
lected are necessary to a choice for Grand Master, Deputy
Grand Master, and Grand Wardens ; and a majority for the
other elective officers.

114 SUBORDINATE LODGES — REMOVAL OF.

In North Carolina, two-thirds are necessary for Grand
Master, and a majority for the other Grand officers.

In Wisconsin, two-thirds are necessary for Grand Master
and Grand Wardens, and a majority for the other elective
officers.

In Subordinate Lodges. — The by-laws of subordinate lodges
usually prescribe the majority necessary to elect to the re-
spective offices. In the absence of such regulation, a major-
ity is sufficient. — G. W. C.

Miscellaneous. — In the opinion of your Committee, a ballot
for the election of officers cannot be reconsidered. — Com.
Conn., 1856.

Where a resident of Pennsylvania was elected Master of a
lodge in New York, it was held by the Grand Master of New
York that the election was valid. — Mas. Mes., 1858.

Kemoval of Lodges.

A lodge cannot hold its meetings in any town other than
the one specified in its charter, without permission from the
Grand Lodge or Grand Master. A lodge cannot remove its
place of meeting from one place to another, in the same town,
without previous notice given to all its members, and at least
a majority consenting thereto.

No petition for the removal of a lodge from the place in
which it is located shall be sustained in Grand Lodge, unless
said petition is sanctioned by the District Deputy Grand Mas-
ter of the district where said lodge is situated, and has the
approbation of the lodge nearest the place where said lodge
is intended to be held, unless such approbation be unreason-
ably withheld. Nor shall any lodge hold meetings, unless
authorized by the Grand Master, in any town other than the
one designated in its charter, under the penalty of a forfeiture
thereof. — Const. Me.

Whereas disputes have arisen about the removal of lodges
from one house to another, and it has been questioned in
whom that power is vested ; it is hereby declared, That no

SUBORDINATE LODGES — REMOVAL OF. 115

lodge shall be removed without the Master's knowledge;
that no motion be made for removing in the Master's absence ;
ami that, if the motion be seconded or thirded, the Master
shall order summons to every individual member, specifying
the business, and appointing a day for hearing and determin-
ing the affair, at least ten days before ; and that the determin-
ation shall be made by the majority, provided the Master be
one of that majority : But if he be of the minority against
removing, the lodge shall not be removed, unless the majority
consists of full two-thirds of the members present. But if
the Master sliall refuse to direct such summons, either of the
Wardens may do it : And if the Master neglects to attend
on the day fixed, the Warden may preside in determining the
affair in the manner prescribed ; but they shall not, in the
Master's absence, enter upon any other cause but what is
particularly mentioned in the summons : And if the lodge is
thus regularly ordered to be removed, the Master or Warden
shall send notice thereof to the Secretary of the Grand Lodge.
— G. L. Eng., 1738.

No lodge shall for the future be deemed regularly removed,
until the removal thereof shall be approved and allowed by
the Grand Master, or his Deputy for the time being. — lb., 1754.

Whenever the members of a lodge wish to remove it from
one town to another, the Master shall summon every member
of the lodge to attend a special meeting, for the express pur-
pose of taking the subject of removal into consideration.

If the lodge shall deem a removal of more than two miles
from where they usually hold their meetings expedient, they
shall present a petition for that purpose to the Grand Lodge,
which petition shall be signed by not less than two-thirds of the
members of the lodge desiring a removal, and shall be accompa-
nied with certificates from the two nearest lodges, testifying
their approbation of the proposed measure. — Const. N. H.

In future, every petition for the removal of a lodge from
the place where it is located, shall be in writing, sanctioned
by the District Deputy Grand Master of its district, and ap-
proved by the lodge nearest the place where it wishes to be

116 SUBORDINATE LODGES — REMOVAL OF.

located, and, for want of the same, shall be dismissed. —
Const. Vt.

In Massachusetts, the constitutional provision is the same
as in Maine, verbatim, except, in place of the words " unless
such approbation be unreasonably withheld," are the words
" the same to be signified, in writing, to the Grand Lodge."

A lodge may not remove its place of meeting from the city,
town or village named in its warrant ; nor from one place to
another in the same city, town or village, except by a concur-
rent vote of two-thirds of the members present at a meeting,
to be appointed by the summons to attend such meeting,
stating its object ; and which summons must be served at
least ten days previous to such meeting ; and such removal
from the city, town or village must receive the sanction of the
Grand Master previous thereto. — Const. N. Y.

The stated place of meeting of a lodge is commonly inserted
in its warrant ; but should circumstances, at any one time,
render such a place of meeting improper, the Master may
convene the k>dg€ a* some other place, if within the limits
named in the warrant. But no lodge can be removed without
the Master's knowledge, nor any motion made for that pur-
pose, unless he be present. When a motion is made to
change the stated place of meeting of the lodge, and is sec-
onded by two members, a summons shall be issued to every
member, stating the proposition for removal, and assigning a
day for hearing and determining upon it; such summons to
be issued at least ten days before the hearing ; and upon such
special call, no other business than that designated shall be
entered upon. A majority of two-thirds of the members
present shall be necessary to authorize such removal ; and,
when resolved, immediate notice shall be given to the Grand
Secretary. The minority may appeal from the vote of the
lodge, directing such removal, and a hearing will be given to
both parties in the Grand Lodge before such removal be con-
firmed and registered. — Const. Venn.

The constitutional regulation in Rhode Island is the sam©

SUBORDINATE LODGES — REMOVAL OP. lit

as in Maine, except that the approbation of the nearest lodge is
required, instead of that of the District Deputy Grand Master.

No motion can be made for the removal of a lodge in the
absence of the Master. But if a motion be made while he is
present for moving the lodge to some other more convenient
place, within the district assigned by the charter, and the said
motion be seconded and thirded, the Master shall order sum-
monses to every individual member of the lodge, specifying
the business, and appointing a time, not less than ten days
distant, for discussing and determining thereon. And if, on the
ultimate vote, the Master is not of the majority, the lodge
shall not be removed, unless two-thirds of the members pres-
ent vote for such removal. But if the Master refuse to direct
such summonses to be issued, then either of the Wardens
may authorize the same ; and if the Master neglects to attend on
the day therein appointed, the lodge may, under the direction
of the Warden, proceed to a decision. If tbe lodge thus reg-
ularly decide on a removal, the Master or Warden shall send
notice to the Grand Secretary, that such removal may be re-
corded in the books of the Grand Lodge. — Const. Va.

The constitutional provision of North Carolina is almost
verbatim as above, except that nothing is said as to where the
removal shall be be made.

No lodge shall change its place of meetings from one village,
town, city or county, to another, without first obtaining per-
mission from the Grand Lodge. — Const. Fla.

No lodge shall be removed from the place where it is lo-
cated, except by the consent of the Grand Lodge, upon peti-
tion by a majority of the members of such lodge, or by per-
mission of the Grand or Deputy Grand Master, given upon
like petition, in cases of emergency, during the recess of the
Grand Lodge. — Const. Ala.

The Constitution of Minnesota provides that no lodge shall
remove its place of meeting from the city, town or village
named in its warrant, nor from one place to another in the
game city, &c, without the concurrent vote of two-tnirds of

118 STJBOKDINATE LODGES — REMOVAL OP.

the memoers at a stated meeting, or at a meeting specially
convened by summons, stating the object, &c, and the sanc°
tion of the Grand Lodge or Grand Master thereto.

Before the vote of any lodge can be taken on its removal
from the place mentioned in its charter, or the surrender of
its charter, it shall be the duty of its Master to cause written
notices to be delivered to each member of the lodge, if prac-
ticable, setting forth the intention to remove or dissolve the
lodge. Such notice shall be given at least one month before
any vote is taken ; but no lodge shall be removed without the
approval of the Grand Master or Grand Lodge. — Const. Tenn.

No lodge shall change its place of meeting from one vil-
lage, town or county, to another, without having first obtained
permission from, the Grand Lodge. — Const. Md.

Every subordinate lodge has a perfect right to hold their
meetings in any part of the town specified in their charter as
the location of their lodge, unless otherwise ordered by the
Grand Lodge. — Res. Conn., 1852.

No lodge has a right to remove from the place named in the
warrant, without the previous consent of the Grand Lodge. —
Hatch, C. F. C. of N. F., 1851.

If a lodge be held in a place not authorized by its charter,
the meeting is illegal, and its proceedings irregular. — C. W.
Moore, 1843.

Where a lodge in Tennessee adjourned to the state of Vir-
ginia, and held a procession, and made masons, held, that such
proceedings were in violation of all masonic custom, and in-
tercourse was prohibited with those thus illegally made, until
they were legally healed. — Va., 1842. The proceedings of
Virginia in the case are right. — C. W. Moore, 1843.

Any lodge may be removed from one house to another,
within the same town or place, at the discretion of its mem-
bers ; but no lodge shall be removed without the Master's
knowledge, nor any motion for removal be made in his ab-
sence. If the motion be regularly made and seconded, the

SUBORDINATE LODGES — PROPERTY OF EXTINCT, ETC. 119

Master shall order summonses to every member, specifying
the business and time for hearing and deciding the question,
at least one week previous. The majority shall determine the
question, provided the Master be one, otherwise two-thirds
are necessary. If the Master refuse to issue summons, or at-
tend, either Warden may do so. — Const. Eng.

A lodge shall not be removed from its usual place of meet-
ing, unless by consent of a majority of its members, duly sum-
moned at least one week previously for that special purpose,
and sanctioned by Grand Lodge and the recommendation of
the provincial Grand Master. — Const. Ire.

The Grand Master may grant a dispensation for a lodge to
remove its place of meeting within a reasonable limit. — Swi-
gert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

No lodge can be removed from the town in which it is sit-
uated to any other place, without the consent of the Grand
Lodge. But a lodge may remove from one part of the town
to another, with the consent of the members, under the follow-
ing restrictions: the removal cannot be made without the
Master's knowledge, nor can any motion for that purpose be
presented in his absence. When such a motion is made, and
properly seconded, the Master will order summonses to every
member, specifying the business, and appointing a day for
considering and determining the affair. And if then a major-
ity of the lodge, with the Master, or two-thirds, without him,
consent to the removal, it shall take place ; but notice thereof
must be sent at once to the Grand Lodge.— Mackey, P. M. L.,
116.

Property of Suspended and Extinct Lodges.

When a lodge, for any cause, forfeits or surrenders its
charter, all its jewels and other property immediately vest in
its Grand Lodge. This is the general rule. Should the lodge
ever be resuscitated or reinstated, the same are usually re-
turned to it.

The Grand Lodge takes possession of the warrant of consti-
tution of an extinct lodge, as a matter of right. But the jew-

120 SUBORDINATE LODGES — PROPERTY OP EXTINCT, ETC.

els and other property it takes only for safe-keeping, and
when it is revived, they will be restored, unless the lodge
should be in arrears to the Grand Lodge. — S. C, 1824. On
any lodge dissolving itself, the funds shall be deposited in the
hands of the Grand Treasurer until such lodge shall be resus-
citated.— lb., 1839. The Grand Lodge disapproves of any
lodge making a distribution of its funds preparatory to surren-
dering its warrant, as the said funds revert to the Grand Lodge,
to be held in trust until said lodge be resuscitated. — lb., 1852.

If any subordinate lodge under this jurisdiction shall see
fit to surrender its charter, it shall be the duty of the last
Master, Treasurer, and Secretary of such subordinate lodge,
to deliver to the Grand Secretary, with the charter, all the
books, papers, jewels, and furniture of said lodge ; and to
pay to the Grand Treasurer the amount of funds remaining
after the debts of said lodge have been liquidated. The
funds, jewels, &c, thus surrendered, to be appropriated by
the Grand Lodge as it shall deem proper for the interest of
the institution. — Const. N. H.

The constitution of Vermont prescribes that, when the
charter of a subordinate lodge is forfeited, the District Dep-
uty Grand Master within whose district it is located, shall de-
mand and receive its charter, records, and property, and
deliver the same to the Grand Lodge.

Every charter surrendered to the Grand Lodge, whether or
not with the intention of being resumed at a future period,
shall be accompanied with the by-laws, records, seal, regalia,
funds, and other property of the lodge, of every description.
* * * * Every charter, when declared forfeited, shall be
returned to the Grand Lodge, with the records, by-laws, seal,
regalia, funds, and other property of the lodge, of every de-
scription; and all members of a lodge who shall refuse to
make such surrender, or who shall vote to divide the funds
thereof among themselves, or to appropriate them in any
other way than is herein designated, shall be liable to expul-
sion from all the rights and privileges of Freemasonry. — Consts.
Mass. and R. I.

SUBORDINATE LODGES — PROPERTY OF EXTINCT, ETC. 121

The Constitution of Maine contains the same provision,
verbatim, except the last clause, which reads, " shall be deemed
guilty of a violation of the rules and regulations of Masonry."

Every charter, when declared forfeited, shall be returned
to the Grand Lodge, with the records, by-laws, seal, regalia,
funds, and other property of the lodge, of every description,
by the last Master and Treasurer thereof, and all members of
such delinquent lodge or lodges who shall refuse to make
such surrender, or who shall, by vote or otherwise, divide
the funds among themselves, or appropriate them to any
other purpose than is herein designated, shall be liable to
expulsion from all the rights and benefits of Masonry. — Const.
R.I.

Upon the demise of any lodge within the jurisdiction of this
Grand Lodge, the last Secretary and Treasurer of such lodge
shall, within six months afterwards, surrender to the Grand
Secretary the charter, books, papers, jewels, furniture, funds
and other property of such lodge. And it shall be the duty of
the Grand Secretary to demand and receive, either in person
or by proxy, from any person who may have possession of
the same, the effects of all lodges whose charters may have
been or shall become forfeited, annulled or revoked by the
Grand Lodge ; and any member of the fraternity who shall
refuse to surrender the same, or any part thereof, when so
demanded, shall be expelled from aU the privileges of Mason-
ry.— Const. Conn.

The surrender or forfeiture of a warrant, when declared by
the Grand Lodge, shall be conclusive upon the lodge and its
members, and carries with it all the property of the lodge,
which becomes the property of the Grand Lodge. — Consts.
N. Y.,Mtnn.

Upon the demise of any lodge within the jurisdiction of this
Grand Lodge, the last Secretary and Treasurer of said lodge
shall, within twelve months afterwards, surrender to the
Grand Secretary the books, papers, jewels and funds thereof,
to be deposited in the archives of the Grand Lodge. — Const.
N.J.

122 SUBOEDINATE LODGES — PROPERTY OF EXTINCT, ETC.

When a lodge is dissolve^ it is the duty of the last Secre-
tary and Treasurer, within three months after its dissolution,
to surrender to the Grand Secretary the warrant, books and
papers, jewels, furniture, and funds of such lodge ; and the
last presiding officer is to transmit to the Grand Secretary an
inventory thereof, and be responsible for the execution of this
article. — Const. Penn.

When the determination of any lodge to return its charter
shall be confirmed by the Grand Lodge, or when a lodge shall
be declared dormant or extinct, the books, papers, funds, fur-
niture, and every thing else belonging to such lodge, should
come under the control, direction, and safe-keeping of the
Grand Lodge. — Const. Va.

Whenever any property, funds, furniture, &c, shall become
forfeited to the Grand Lodge, the Grand Master shall have
power at his discretion to sell, lease or rent the same, or to
loan to a lodge any part thereof, until the ensuing session of
the Grand Lodge ; or he may restore such property on the
revival of a lodge. — Const. N. C.

In case of the suspension or, demise of any lodge, the char-
ter, furniture, jewels, funds and property, shall be delivered
to such person as may be authorized by the Grand Master
to receive the same ; the withholding or other disposal of
such effects will subject the parties concerned to the severest
penalties. — lb.

When a charter held under this Grand Lodge shall be sur-
rendered or forfeited, the whole of the property, jewels, re-
galia, books and papers, shall belong to, and be invested in
the Grand Lodge, and be surrendered to any officer or agent
properly appointed to receive the same. — Const. Fla.

Upon the surrender or forfeiture of a charter by any lodge,
the whole of its property, jewels, regalia, books, papers and
effects, belong to, and are vested in the Grand Lodge, and
suall, with the charter, be transmitted to the Grand Secretary.
* * * * Every member who shall vote to divide the
funds thereof, or to appropriate them in any other way than
herein designated, shall be liable to expulsion. — Const. V. C.

SUBORDINATE LODGES — PROPERTY OF EXTINCT, ETC. 123

Upon the revocation or forfeiture of the charter of any
lodge, it shall be the duty of the last Treasurer and Secretary
thereof to surrender to the Grand Secretary the books, papers,
jewels, furniture, funds and charter of said lodge, within six
months, to be disposed of as the Grand Lodge may think
proper. — Const. Ala.

Lodges which fail to make returns, * * * shall forfeit
their charter, which shall be canceled ; and all their books,
jewels, implements and property, shall revert to the Grand
Lodge. — Const. La.

When a charter shall be surrendered, or become forfeited,
the whole of the property of the subordinate lodge, of every
kind and description, shall be vested in the Grand Lodge, and
subject to its disposal. — Consts. Ohio, Indiana, Ky.

Upon the demise of any lodge within the jurisdiction of
this Grand Lodge, the last Treasurer and Secretary of said
lodge shall, within six months thereafter, surrender to the
Grand Secretary all the books, papers, jewels, funds and fur-
niture of the lodge so demised. — Const. HI.

In Wisconsin, the constitutional provision is nearly verbatim
with that of D. C.

In Iowa and Texas, the rule is the same as in Illinois, ex-
cept that the time for delivery to the Grand Secretary is lim-
ited to three monihs.

In Tennessee, the property must forthwith be delivered to
the Grand Secretary.

Upon the demise of any lodge, so soon as the same shall
cease to exist by any cause, the last Secretary and Treasurer
of the lodge shall, Avitlrin four months thereafter, deliver to the
Grand Secretary all the books, papers, jewels, funds, fur-
niture, charter, seal and property of the lodge so demised ;
and the whole of the property of such lodge shall become the
property of the Grand Lodge, to be disposed of at its pleas-
ure.— Consts. Mo., Kansas.

Upon the demise of any lodge under the jurisdiction of this
Grand Lodge, the books, papers, jewels, funds, furniture, and

1 24 SUBORDINATE . ODGES — PROPERTY OP EXTINCT, ETC.

every thing else belonging to such lodge, belong to, and \est
in this Grand Lodge ; and it shall be the duty of the last pre-
siding officers, Secretary and Treasurer, within six months
after such demise, to surrender the same to the Grand Secre-
tary.— Const. Ark.

In case of the forfeiture of the charter, or dissolution of a
lodge, from any cause whatever, all its books, papers, jewels,
funds, and other property, shall be forfeited to the Grand
Lodge. — Const. Cal.

In case of the forfeiture of the charter, or the dissolution,
from any cause whatever, of a lodge, all its books (&c.) shall
be forthwith transmitted to the Secretary of the Grand
Lodge. — Const. Oregon.

Upon the demise of a lodge, the last Secretary and Treas-
urer shall, within six months thereafter, transmit or surrender
to the Grand Secretary, or to any other brother who may be
appointed by the Grand Lodge to receive them, the charter,
seal, books, papers, jewels, furniture and funds of said lodge.
—Const. Md.

The subordinate lodges were created for certain purposes,
and invested with certain powers necessary to their accom-
plishment. Their masonic charters confer upon them all the
power and authority they can rightfully exercise. It author-
izes them to confer the degrees, and receive and hold such
funds as may lawfully come into their possession, for distrib-
ution among the poor and indigent ; but it does not authorize
them to exercise these functions beyond the period of their
existence, which existence, as a masonic body, terminates, oi
course, with the said masonic charter. These powers do not
reside with the members of these lodges individually, nor are
they dependent on, but consequent upon the existence of the
^odge, and cannot, therefore, survive it. Whenever a lodge
ceases to exist, all the rights and powers conferred by their
masonic charter must necessarily be at an end. These lodges
might, with equal propriety, claim the right of conferring the
degrees, as )f controlling tneir funds, after the termination of
their charters ; these rights can only be exercised by lodges

SUBORDINATE LODGES SURRENDERING CITARTER. ] 25

in their corporate capacities, and not by individual masons,
however numerous, and respectable. These lodges are the
agents or trustees merely, instead of being the rightful own-
ers of the property; they hold the funds, not in their own
right, but in trust; and by the surrender or annulling of their
charters, they become incapacitated themselves, and cannot
lawfully act as agents or trustees. — Rep. Com. R. I., 1840.*

Upon vacating the charter, or other demise of any lodge
under this jurisdiction, the last Treasurer and Secretary,
Master and Wardens of such lodge shall, within three months
thereafter, surrender to the Grand Secretary all the books,
papers, jewels, furniture and funds of such lodge. — Const Del.

Surrendering Charter.
By the unanimous consent of its members, a lodge may at
any time surrender its charter to the Grand Lodge. If, how-
ever, seven or more members refuse to give their consent, the
charter catmot be surrendered. This seems to be the opinion
of our best authorities, and is founded upon the well-settled
rule that seven is a sufficient number of petitioners for a
charter. If seven are sufficient to receive, seven are sufficient
to retain.

If, therefore, the majority of a lodge should determine to
leave the institution, or that lodge, the constitution, or power
of assembling, remains with the rest of the members who ad-
here to their allegiance. If the number remaining, however,
be reduced to less than seven, the charter shall be returned,
agreeably to the regulation in such cases provided. — Consis.
Me., Mass., and R. I.

In Virginia, two-thirds majority, at a meeting specially

* The report concluded with a resolution, the same in substance as the pres-
ent constitutional provision of that Grand Lodge, which was unanimously
adopted.

126 SUBORDINATE LODGES — SURRENDERING CHARTER.

summoned, are necessary to enter a proposal for surrendering
the charter upon the record ; and, after laying over one month,
if the same majority at a regular meeting, summoned as be-
fore, shall so decide, and the same be confirmed by Grand
Lodge, the charter may be surrendered.

So long as there remain in any lodge seven master masons
willing and desirous of working as a lodge, who are regular
members thereof in good standing, the remaining members
have not the power to surrender the charter of such lodge. —
Const Ga.

Wherever it shall be thought advisable by any seven mem-
bers of a lodge, expressed in writing, at a regular communi-
cation, to surrender its charter, the Master shall direct sum-
monses to issue immediately to every member within the ju-
risdiction, stating the intention so to surrender ; and it shall
be regarded as determined in favor of such surrender, unless
the votes of at least seven members present at the next reg-
ular communication shall be in favor of its retention. — Const.
D. C.

No lodge can surrender its charter without taking the same
steps as are necessary to amend or abrogate its by-laws ; and,
in all cases, written notice of the intention to surrender must
be given to each member, at least one month preceding the
meeting at which action is proposed. — Const. Mich.

Nor shall any lodge surrender its charter without the con-
sent of a majority of said lodge.* — Const. Tenn.

So long as there remain in any lodge seven master masons
willing and desirous of existing as a lodge, the other members
cannot surrender the charter of such lodge ; but a majority
present, by concurrence of the Master and Wardens, may
suspend the lodge until the next meeting of the Grand Lodge.
— Consts. Mo., Kansas.

If, therefore, the majority of any lodge should determine to
quit the lodge, the constitution, or power of assembling, re-

* See also a quotation from the same constitution, under head of " Removal of
dodges."

SUBORDINATE LODGES— SURRENDERING CHARTER. 127

Plains with the rest of the members. If all the members of a
lodge withdraw themselves, their warrant ceases and be-
comes extinct, — Const. Ga.

Nor can a subordinate lodge voluntarily surrender its char-
ter.— Const. Ala.

In 1857, the Grand Master of Vermont, (Tucker,) in a case
referred to him, decided that a lodge could not surrender its
charter, and dissolve, " so long as a minority large enough to
officer a lodge fully existed, opposed to dissolution."

The Grand Lodges of New York and Missouri (1856) de-
cided that, so long as seven members remained, opposed to a
dissolution, a charter could not be surrendered.

In commenting on the above, the C. F. C. of N. Y., (King,)
for 1857, says: "this is generally regarded as common law in
the fraternity, though upon what basis it is founded, we con-
fess our researches have not revealed."

A motion to surrender a charter cannot come before the
lodge without previous notice. — C. W. Moore.

The whole matter is subject to local regulation. There
being no Grand Lodge constitutional provision to the con-
trary, under the general practice in this country, a majority
of the members may vote to surrender the charter. An ac
ceptance of the charter by the Grand Lodge or Grand Mas-
ter, is necessary to complete the surrender. As it requires
seven petitioners to obtain a charter, it would seem that a
less number cannot continue to hold it. — C. W. Moore.

Should the majority of any lodge determine to retire from
it, the power of assembling remains with the rest of the mem-
bers who adhere to their allegiance ; but if all the members
of a lodge withdraw, the warrant becomes extinct. — Const.
Eng. Mackey, P. M. L., 109.

It is not in the power of a majority of the members of a
lodge to surrender its charter, so long as seven members
thereof continue to work under said charter. — Reg. III.

128 SUBORDINATE LODGES — RESTORATION OF CHARTER.

Restoration of Charter.

The only rule with which we are acquainted, relating to the
restoration of charters voluntarily surrendered, is that em-
bodied in the second clause of the regulation of Maine, of
1820, which requires a petition from at least seven of the
original members. If the Grand Master arrest the charter of
a lodge, for any cause, he may restore it, at his discretion. If
a charter is declared forfeited, or is arrested by the Grand
Lodge, the latter may also restore it, at its pleasure.

It is competent for the Grand Lodge to say to whom the
charter shall be intrusted, though it has no power to impose
any unusual restrictions upon those receiving it. If the
Grand Master restore a charter he had previously arrested,
he restores with it also all the rights and privileges pre-
viously enjoyed under it.

No charter returned to the Grand Lodge shall be restored,
unless its records, by-laws, seal and regalia were returned
with it ; nor unless seven of the applicants for its restoration
were members when it was returned, if so many be living. —
Const. Me., 1820.

I have been unable to find any authority vesting me with
power to resuscitate a dormant lodge that has not surrendered
its charter to the Grand Lodge; and especially when its
original members had been reduced to a less number than is
required for the formation of a new lodge, and they asking for
authority to meet in a town where they were not originally
located by their charter. — Chase, G. M. of Me., 1855. Un-
doubtedly the Grand Master (above) is right in his view of
the case.— C. F. C. of N. J., 1857.

This Grand Lodge is incompetent to restore a charter after
the same has been legally surrendered. — Res. Mich., 1858.

This is a variance from the practice of most American
Grand Lodges.— C. F. C. III., 1858.

When a charter is arrested, or surrendered to the Grand
Master, if he returns it to the lodga, he has no power to re-

SUBORDINATE LODGES — REPRESENTATIVES IN G. L. 129

strict its rights ; but the lodge is placed in the same position
it was when it was surrendered or arrested. — Mo., 1857.

Representatives in Grand Lodge-

A lodge has the right to be represented in Grand Lodge
by its Master and Wardens ; and no Grand Lodge, in our
opinion, can restrict or interfere with that right, it being as
ancient and sacred as the law regulating their own existence.
If this position be correct, a Grand Lodge cannot deprive the
Wardens of their lodges of a seat and vote in Grand Lodge.
The right of representing in Grand Lodge cannot be taken
from cither of the first three officers without their consent. —
C. W. Moore.

A Lodge may Instruct its Representatives. — The same
law that declares who are the representatives of a lodge, also
gives the lodge the right to instruct such representatives as
to their votes in Grand Lodge. Though this right has been
recently denied, we believe it to be too firmly established to
be overthrown or explained away.

The majority of every particular lodge, when congregated,
shall have the privilege of giving instruction to their Master
and Wardens, before the assembling of the Grand chapter or
lodge, at the three quarterly communications hereafter men-
tioned, and of the annual Grand Lodge too ; because their
Master and Wardens are their representatives, and are sup-
posed to speak their mind. — Old Reg., 1720, x.

The majority of the members of any lodge, when duly as-
sembled, shall have the right to instruct their Master and
Wardens as their representatives in Grand Lodge. — Const.
Mass., R. I., and Eng.

When the Master and Wardens meet in Grand Lodge, they
do so, not by inherent right, but by special law, and as the
delegated representatives of their lodges, and the moment
they deny that relation, (refuse to obey instructions,) they
usurp undue authority, if they do not unseat themselves. —
Parvin, C. F. C. Iowa, 1858.
6*

130 SUBORDINATE LODGES — EEPRESENTATIVES OF ABSENT.

The Master and Wardens are bound on all questions that
come before the Grand Lodge, truly to represent their
lodge, and vote according to its instructions. — Mackey, P.
M. L., 106.

The majority of every particular lodge, when duly congre-
gated, shall have the privilege of giving instructions to their
Master and Wardens, or representatives, before the meeting
of the Grand Lodge. — Consts. N. J., Ca.

The majority of the members of a lodge, when assembled,
may instruct their Master and Wardens on any subject to be
considered in the Grand Lodge, and such instructions re-
corded on the minutes of the lodge, shall be binding upon
such representatives. — Const. Penn.

It is very doubtful whether the officers of a subordinate
lodge are in any manner bound by any instructions that may
be given by their lodges, as to what they shall vote for or
against in the Grand Lodge. — Stoker, C. F. C. Conn., 1856.

It is the declaration of a law of Masonry, older than the
masonic government of this country, that the majority of
every particular lodge, when congregated, not else, shall have
the privilege of giving instructions to their Master and War-
dens.—C. W. Moore, 1859.

Representatives of Absent Lodges.

A Grand Lodge cannot appoint proxies to represent a
lodge not present by its Master, Wardens, or their proxies.
Such power would be inconsistent with the letter and spirit
cf the masonic constitutions, and tend to the overthrow of
the whole masonic fabric.

Resolved, That the Grand Master appoint some worthy
brethren to represent the lodges not now represented at this
grand communication. — Wis., 1849. We cannot assent to the
doctrine. No where in the laws or usages of Masonry do we
find this power delegated to, or invested in, either the Grand
Master or Grand Lodge. — Parvin, C. F. C. Iowa, 1850

We think that neither the Grand Master nor the Grand

SUBORDINATE LODGE8 — PROXIES TO GRAND LODGE. 131

Lodge have an inherent right, or the power to appoint any
brother to represent an absent lodge. — Haswell, C. F. C. of
YL, 1851. Hatch, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1851.
Proxies to Grand Lodge.

Every lodge is entitled to be represented in its Grand
Lodge. By common consent, since 1718, the Master and
Wardens are its legal and proper representatives. Should
these, or either of them, be unable to attend the Grand Lodge
at any communication, a brother or brothers may be ap-
pointed in their place. Such substituted representatives are
called proxies, and, in the absence of their principal, succeed
to all his powers and privileges, but in his presence they
cannot act.

The general rule in relation to the appointment of proxies,
is, that they must be master masons, be members of some sub-
ordinate lodge under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge, and
must be furnished with a written certificate of their appoint-
ment, under the seal of the lodge or party appointing them.
A proxy cannot appoint a proxy, without written authority
for that purpose.

An officer of Grand Lodge who is not at the same time a
Master or Warden of a subordinate lodge, cannot appoint a
proxy, as such officer, unless the constitution specifically give
him such power.

The Grand Master is the only masonic officer who has the
power or right of appointing his proxy, for any purpose,
unless such power be granted by the particular constitution.

Each lodge is authorized to appoint any master mason of
regular standing, not holding office in Grand Lodge, and
being a member of a subordinate lodge under this jurisdic-
tion, as proxy to represent them in the Grand Lodge ; and
such proxy shall have a right to a seat in the Grand Lodge
during the masonic year in which he was appointed, and to
vote when the Master and Wardens of the lodge he repre-
sents, shall not all be present. — Const. Me.

No brother can be appointed the proxy of a member of the

132 SUBORDINATE LODGES — PROXIES TO GRAND LODGE.

Grand Lodge, unless he be a master mason, and a member in
good standing of a subordinate lodge. — Const. N. H.

The Master and Wardens of any subordinate lodge under
the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, who cannot personally
attend the commnnications thereof, annual or special, shall
have the right to constitute a proxy, which proxy shall have
the same powers and privileges in the Grand Lodge as his
principal would, if present ; and such proxy shall be a mas-
ter mason, and a member of some lodge within the jurisdic-
tion of this Grand Lodge. — Const. Vt.

In Massachusetts, the constitutional provision is the same
as in Maine, except that the proxy can only vote when the
Master and Wardens of the lodge he represents shall not,
either of them, be present.

When it shall happen that either of the officers of the Grand
Lodge cannot personally attend the annual meetings or quar-
terly communications, they shall severally have power and
authority, under their respective hands and seals, to consti-
tute a proxy, who shall be entitled to a voice and a vote in
the Grand Lodge ; and any member may have the like privi-
lege of appointing a proxy, who may exercise the rights and
privileges appertaining to his constituent ; but no proxy shall
be appointed to represent an officer of a subordinate lodge
who is not a member of the same. — Const. R. 1.

In addition to the above, the constitution contains a section
verbatim with that of Massachusetts, (as previously quoted,)
and adds : " And in the absence of any other representative,
any Past Master present may be the representative of the
lodge of which he is a member."

The Masters and Wardens of subordinate lodges shall have
the privilege of appointing proxies to attend the communica-
tions of the Grand Lodge, which proxies shall have the same
powers and privileges as their constituents, * * * which
proxies must be master masons, in good standing, members
of the same lodge with their constituents ; and the certificate
of their appointment as proxy must be sigued by the Master

SUBORDINATE LODGES— PROXIES TC GRAND LODGE. 133

or Warden in whose place they are appo'nted to act— Const.
Conn.

The Master and Wardens of every warranted lodge are, of
right and inalienably, representatives in, and members of the
Grand Lodge; and, in case they do not attend the Grand
Lodge, a proxy may be appointed by the lodge to represent
it in the Grand Lodge, who, in such case, shall have three
votes. — Const. N. Y.

When the officer of any particular lodge, from such urgent
necessity as may plead his excuse, cannot personally attend
the Grand Lodge, he may nominate and send a brother of his
lodge, * * * provided such brother hath heretofore been
in the same office with the brother who deputes him, or in
some higher office. * * * If a single brother is deputed
to represent all the officers of any particular lodge, he ought
not to be under the rank of Past Master, and member of the
lodge he is chosen to represent ; and his commission as proxy
must be under the seal of the lodge that appoints him, signed
by the Master, and countersigned by the Secretary. — Const.
N.J.

Lodges located more than three miles from the place of
meeting of the Grand Lodge, may be represented by a proxy,
who must be a Past Master, and a member of the Grand
Lodge, commissioned under the signatures of the Master and
Secretary, and the seal of the lodge which he represents. —
Const. Penn.

The Master and Wardens, when unable to attend the com-
munications of the Grand Lodge, may nominate and send a
brother of their lodge who has served in the same or some
higher office, with their jewels, to represent them in the
Grand Lodge ; the Master sending a Past Master, and the
Wardens, Past Wardens, or Past Masters, as their represent-
atives.— lb.

When any Master or Warden of a subordinate lodge, from
such urgent business as may reasonably plead his excuse,
cannot attend the Grand Lodge, his lodge may appoint any

134 SUBOKDINATE LODGES — PROXIES TO GRAND LODGE.

one of their members, or other brother mason, to supply hia
place in grand communication, provided that no brother shall
represent a subordinate lodge in the Grand Lodge, unless he
be a resident of the masonic district wherein such lodge is sit-
uated, or the Master or Warden of the lodge which he may
represent; and no brother shall represent more than three
lodges. Every brother thus deputed to represent a lodge,
shall be furnished with a certificate of his appointment, under
the seal of the lodge appointing him, and the attestation of
the Secretary thereof. — Const. Va.

In all cases where special representatives shall not be ap-
pointed by any subordinate lodge, and the Master and War
dens of any lodge cannot, personally, attend the Grand Lodge,
they shall have the privilege of constituting a proxy ; and
such proxy shall be a master mason, and a member of some
lodge under this jurisdiction. — Const. N. C.

Every country lodge shall appoint one or more proxies
(not exceeding three) to represent it in the Grand Lodge at
Charleston. Proxies shall be Past Masters and members of
the Grand Lodge. No individual shall act as proxy for more
than two lodges at the same time. * * * When the Mas-
ter or Wardens of a lodge cannot personally attend at the
communications of the Grand Lodge, the Master of such lodge
shall depute a brother or brethren of his lodge for that pur-
pose, provided he or they have served in the same or a
higher office. — Const. S. C.

When the Master of any particular lodge, from such urgent
business or necessity as may sufficiently excuse him, cannot
personally attend the Grand Lodge, he may nominate and
send a Past Master of his lodge, with a proxy, under the seal
of -the lodge, to supply his place, and support the honor of
his lodge in the Grand Lodge ; and in case of failure on the
part of the Master to appoint his proxy, by the regular meet-
ing of his lodge which next precedes the Annual Communica-
tion, the lodge at that meeting shall elect, by ballot, a del-
egate, who shall be a Past Master of said lodge, to represent
the lodge. If there be none of that degree members of such

SUBORDINATE LODGES — PROXIES TO GRAND LODGE. 135

lodge, then they may elect any Past Master entitled to a seat
in Grand Lodge, to represent them. — Const. Ga.

The proper representatives of a lodge are the Master and
Wardens ; but the lodge may appoint one or more brethren,
not exceeding three, to represent it, in case of the absence
of the Master or either of the Wardens. Should the lodge
not think proper to make such appointment of proxies, then
each officer of a subordinate lodge may appoint his own
proxy. — Const. D. C.

Li Alabama, the Master and Wardens of any lodge, or
either of them, may appoint any member of their lodge to act
as their proxy in Grand Lodge. The proxy must be a mas-
ter mason, and a member of the lodge he represents.

In Louisiana, the rule is the same as above, except that the
proxy must be a member of some lodge under the jurisdic-
tion, hold no office in Grand Lodge, and represent no other
lodge therein.

In Ohio, the Master or Wardens of any lodge can appoint
his or their proxy to the Grand Lodge ; or it is competent for
the lodge, by resolution, to choose a proxy. In either case
the proxy must be a member of some lodge under the juris-
diction.

The above, except that part relating to Wardens who are
not members of Grand Lodge, is also the rule in Indiana.

In Illinois and Iowa, any Master or Warden may depute
any brother, being of equal rank, or superior to himself, to
represent him in Grand Lodge. When the Master and War-
dens depute the same brother to represent them, he must
have attained at least to the rank of Past Master.

In Michigan, proxies of Master, Warden, or the entire
lodge, (in case the Master and Wardens are all absent,) must
"be a member of the lodge, and be appointed by the lodge.
Lodges in the " Upper Peninsula " may, however, be repre-
sented by any member in the Grand Lodge jurisdiction.

In Wisconsin, a proxy must be appointed by the lodge,
and be a member of some lodge under the jurisdiction.

136 SUBORDINATE LODGES — PROXIES TO GRAND LODGE.

The Constitution of Minnesota (impliedly) allows a Master
or Warden to appoint his proxy, who must have arrived to
the rank of Warden.

In Kentucky, the appointment of proxies must be made by
the vote of the lodge, and they must be members of the lodge.

In Tennessee, in all cases where the Master and Wardens
cannot give their personal attendance in Grand Lodge, they
may appoint their proxy or proxies. If they shall fail to ap-
point, special representatives may be appointed by a resolu-
tion of the lodge. A proxy or representative must be a
master mason, and a member of some lodge in the juris-
diction.

In Missouri, the Master and Wardens of any lodge, or
either of them, may depute any member of their own lodge,
who is of equal or superior rank with themselves, as a proxy
to represent their lodge in Grand Lodge.

In Arkansas, the officer of any particular lodge may nom-
inate and send a brother of his lodge to supply his room in
Grand Lodge.

No lodge under this jurisdiction, and within this state,
shall be represented by a proxy who is not a member of the
lodge. — Const. Cal.

Should neither of the representative officers, or Past Mas-
ters of a lodge, attend any communication of Grand Lodge,
such lodge, by a vote of the lodge, may delegate any other
brother entitled to a seat in Grand Lodge to represent their
lodge, but no brother can represent more than three lodges.
— Const. Co..

The proper ^representatives of a lodge are the Master and
Wardens ; but in case they cannot attend, the lodge may ap-
point one or more brethren to represent it.'— Const. Md.

Grand Masters only are allowed deputies, substitutes and
proxies. — Dermott, 1772.

The Grand Lodge of Vermont permitted one of its members,
who had also been appointed proxy for a subordinate lodge,
to vote as such proxy, although he had lost or mislaid his

SUBORDINATE LODGES — PROXIES TO GRAND LODGE. 137

commission as such proxy. The Com. on For, Cor. of New
York objected to such action, as a precedent liable to abuse.
Grand Master Tucker (Vermont in 1852) admitted the valid-
ity of the objection, and declared that, to create voting mem-
bership on parol, where written evidence is required by a
regulation, does not present any very rational claims for calm
approval.

Proxies of Masters in the Grand Lodge, must be Past Mas-
ters ; of Senior Wardens, Past Masters, or Past Senior War-
dens; of Junior Wardens, Past Masters, or Past Wardens,
either Senior or Junior ; and representatives of lodges must
be Past Masters. — Reg. Miss., 1857. «

In Nebraska, a Master or Warden has power to appoint
his proxy to Grand Lodge ; and in case they decline, the
lodge can, by resolution, designate some brother as its proxy.

A proxy must be a member of some lodge under the juris-
diction.

A proxy is as much a member, for the time being, as
would be the principal, if present C. W. Moore, 1848.

A proxy must be a member of some lodge. — Tenn. 1843.
C. W. Moore, 1844.

In Kansas, the Master and Wardens, or either of them, may
appoint any brother of equal or superior rank, and a member
of some lodge in the jurisdiction, to represent them in Grand
Lodge.

A proxy cannot appoint a proxy. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1852.

If neither the Master nor either of the Wardens can attend
any communication of Grand Lodge, the Master, with assent
of the lodge to which he belongs, may appoint any mastei
mason, and member of the lodge, a proxy. The appointment
must be under the hand of the Master and Secretary, and seal
of the lodge. — Const. Del.

The only officer who can appoint his own proxy is the
Grand Master. — Morris, Am. F. M., iv.,12.

138 SUBORDINATE LODGES — EXPIRATION OF COMMISSIONS.

Expiration of Commissions.
The commission of a proxy expires with the closing of the
annual grand communication immediately succeeding his ap-
pointment, unless the commission itself, or the Grand Consti-
tution otherwise prescribe.

All commissions of proxies shall expire with the closing of
the Grand Lodge, on the festival of St. John the Evangelist,
or the day of installation. — Const. Mass.

All commissions of proxies of the Grand Lodge shall ex-
pire with the closing of the Grand Lodge at its next annual
communication after such appointment. — Const. Maine.

Proxies appointed by the lodge hold their places until the
next annual communication, unless the Grand Lodge be
officially advised of a change by the lodge. Proxies of any
particular officer are only for the communication immediately
succeeding their appointment. — Const. B. C.

In "Wisconsin, a proxy is appointed for only one communi-
cation of Grand Lodge, and his commission expires with the
closing of that communication.

LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

The practice of first granting a dispensation, instead of a
charter, to the petitioners for a new lodge, is a modern, and
almost exclusively an American one. Formerly the Grand
Master issued a warrant or charter for new lodges, at his dis-
cretion. At a later date, the privilege has been restricted to
his granting a letter of "dispensation" to certain brethren, to
meet as a lodge for a specified time, (at first for thirty, afterj
wards for sixty days, and now usually for one year, or until
the next succeeding annual meeting of the Grand Lodge,)
when the Grand Lodge may grant or withhold a charter.

Originally lodges under dispensation possessed all the
rights and privileges of a chartered lodge, except that of re-
presentation in Grand Lodge ; but the present American
usage is, to limit them to those privileges specifically named
in the dispensation. The justness of such restriction is at
least questionable, and we are unable to see why the original
plan should not be adhered to.

The privileges now generally conceded to such lodges are
simply the right to meet as a lodge, and initiate, pass, and
raise candidates. In several jurisdictions additional privi-
leges are allowed them ; while in one (New Hampshire) they
are only allowed to initiate into the first degree.

The authorities and references under this head will be
found various and conflicting, though it is hoped that some
uniform usage will ere long prevail.

Installation of Officers in. — There is a great diversity of
opinion in relation to the propriety or necessity of installing
the officers of a lodge under dispensation, and the practice is

140 LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION,

equally conflicting. The most general opinion, however, ia
opposed to the practice, and the general American usage is
against such installation.

The brother appointed to fill the office of Master may law-
fully take the chair without any further qualification. He
cannot be installed. — C. W. Moore, 1846.

The officers of a lodge working under dispensation cannot
be installed. — La., 1857.

It is not correct to install the officers of a lodge under dis-
pensation.— Iowa, 1857.

It is well settled that the officers of a lodge under dispensa-
tion cannot be installed. — English, C. F. C. Ark., 1857. This

we understand to be the generally received opinion Abell,

C. F. C. Cat, 1858.

Officers acting under dispensation are not installed ; neither
can such lodge, until acting, or rather, ready to act under a
charter, be dedicated. — Hubbard, G. M. Ohio, 1851.

I decided it was unnecessary to install the officers of a
lodge under dispensation. — Smith, G. M. Ark., 1856.

It is an old law of Masonry, connected with the Past Mas-
ter's degree, as we understand it in Mississippi, that no officer
who has not been elected can be installed, and that none can
be elected until the organization of a lodge under the charter.
— Mellen, C. F. C. Miss., 1856.

The officers of a lodge working under dispensation cannot
be installed. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1852. Com. Juris, do. Grand
Lodge do.

We are not acquainted with any rule which requires that
the presiding officer of a lodge under dispensation shall be a
Past Master. * * * The officers of lodges U. D. are
neither elected nor installed. — Mellen, C. F. C, Miss., 1856.

A lodge under dispensation is a lodge for one special pur-
pose, that of conferring degrees, and the officers are not en-
titled to installation, because the lodge is not chartered.—
C. F. C. Md., 1854.

LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION. 141

The officers do not receive installation under a dispensation.
-Hatch, C. F. C. of N. Y , 1851.

A lodge under dispensation may not at their own will elect
a new set of officers, or have any installation whatever. —
C. F. C. 111., 1851.

Officers working under dispensation should never be in-
stalled, but are authorized to work without. — Storer, C. F. C.
Ct., 1853.

It is not only unnecessary, but improper, to install the of-
ficers of a lodge under dispensation. — Mellen, Acacia, 1855.

We disapprove of the election or installation of the officers
of a lodge under dispensation. — Mo., 1858.

Installation of officers of a chapter U. D. is not essential,
and shall no longer take place in this jurisdiction. — Res. Gr.
Cliap. Texas, 1853.

In Alabama, the officers of a lodge under dispensation are
installed, and the lodge formally organized, or set to work. —
Vide Pro. Ala., 1851.

In New Jersey, officers of lodges under dispensation are
elected and installed. — Vide Pro. 1855.

In Kentucky, it is the custom to have the Master of a lodge
U. D. regularly installed. — McCorkle, C. F. C. Ky., 1857.

Officers of lodges under dispensation must be regularly in-
stalled, the same as those of a chartered lodge. — Swigert, G.
M. Ky., 1858.

I think lodges under dispensation should accompany their
petition for a charter with a recommendation of certain mem-
bers as officers, and if approved by the Grand Lodge, the of-
ficers thus named should be installed. Or the officer empow-
ered to constitute the lodge should first open a Master's lodge,
under the charter, hold an election, and then complete his
duties.— Perkins, G. M. La., 1856.

Election of Otficers in. — According to the American prac-
tice and usage, a lodge under dispensation cannot elect

142 LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

officers. Its principal officers are those named as such in the
dispensation ; and the one therein appointed Master has full
power to appoint the subordinate officers. In case of a va-
cancy in the East, the Senior, and after him the Junior War-
den, succeeds to the office and duties of Master, and fills all
vacancies by pro tern, appointment. The Grand Master, how-
ever, has power to fill any vacancy in either of the principal
offices, at his discretion. (See authorities under the general
head.)

No election should take place in a lodge under dispensation.
—Reg. 111.

Lodges under dispensation have no power whatever to
elect their officers. — Ark., 1846.

Not invested with power to elect officers. — Gray, Miss.,
1853.

Such a lodge cannot elect officers. — Sayre, C. F. C. Ala.,
1854.

Such a congregation of masons cannot elect officers. —
Whiting, C. F. C. of D. C, 1856.

In New Jersey and Kansas, such lodges are allowed to
elect. officers. — G. W. C.

Membership in. — The general opinion is, that lodges under
dispensation cannotjaffiliate members. The only ones entitled
to vote, or transact business in such a lodge, are those named
in the dispensation. This we believe is the most general
usage at the present time, though there are sufficient excep-
tions to the rule to raise serious doubts of its correctness.
Brothers who have been initiated, passed, and raised in a
lodge under dispensation, have not a right to vote until they
become members of a chartered lodge. — Com. Juris, of Va.f
1856.

Lodges under dispensation have not power to admit mem-
bers.— Minn., 1857.

None but the persons named in the dispensation ha^ve a
right to ballot for a candidate — Mellen, Acacia, 1855.

LODGES QNDER DISPENSATION. 143

None but those recorded in the dispensation are members
of a lodge under dispensation. — Morris, Am. F. 31., ii., 18.

The best authorities agree that a lodge under dispensation
is not empowered to receive members, nor are its officers en-
titled to installation. The persons made masons therein can-
not even become members of that particular body, and have
no right to vote therein until the lodge is duly chartered.—
Storer, C. F. C. Conn., 1857.

There is no doubt in this jurisdiction, though anothei
practice once prevailed, that they have no right to receive
members by affiliation. We allow in Mississippi now, by a
special regulation, those raised in the lodge to become mem-
bers.— Mellen, C. F. C. Miss., 1856.

The C. F. C. of Md., 1855, deny the right of lodges under
dispensation to affiliate members.
Cannot admit members. — Mackey.

Lodges U. D. cannot admit members by electiou; but a
master mason raised in such lodge shall be considered a mem-
ber of it. Such lodges may grant certificates of demits the
same as chartered lodges, and shall have a seal. They can-
not try offenses. They cannot fill vacancies in office, except
vro tern., and then only in offices below the Junior Warden. —
Reg. Miss.

The only legal members of a lodge under dispensation are
those named in the dispensation itself; none others have a
right to vote on any question before the lodge. — C. W. Moore,
1849.

In all dispensations hereafter to be issued, it shall be dis-
tinctly stated that the officers mentioned in dispensations are
the only persons authorized to hold such offices; and that
lodges under dispensation have no power to affiliate mem-
bers.— Res. Ala., 1850.

The persons named in the petition as officers and members,
are, by the warrant of dispensation, the only ones authorized
to assemble and transact business as a lodge. Other master
masons applying should only be received by a unanimous

144 LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

vote. But when so received, I think they should be permit
te*.. (more by courtesy than by strict right) to ballot upon all
after applications for initiation. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

In the opinion of this Grand Lodge, all master masons made
by lodges under dispensation have the same right to ballot
for candidates, and to participate in all questions that may
come before their respective lodges, as those made by char-
tered lodges.— Res. Mich., 185G.

In our opinion, no one can ballot but the persons named in
the dispensation.— King, C. F. C. of N. ¥., 1855.

Hereafter, in issuing dispensations to open new lodges, the
privilege of receiving members by affiliation shall be granted.
— Res. Cal., 1855. We concur in the principle of this resolu-
tion.—Barber, C. F. C. Ark., 1856.

We think the Grand Lodge (Cal.) has transcended its pow-
ers.— C. F. C. ofD. C, 1856.

We do not favor the law that lodges under dispensation
cannot increase their members. It is perfectly within the
province of every Grand Lodge to reverse it. — Morris, Am.
F. M., iii., 10.

They may affiliate members. — Res. Texas, 1852.

In Indiana, lodges U. D. have always been accustomed to
admit members. — Miss., 1855.

A lodge under dispensation may increase its members by
affiliation, the same as any other lodge. — Swigert, G. M. Ky.,
1858.

May admit new members, and such members have the same
right to vote as though the lodge was chartered. — C. Moore,
Mas. Rev., v., 150.

Membership in a lodge U. D. is not incompatible with
membership in a chartered lodge. The English rule is a good
one, which requires the brethren holding the dispensation to
be members of some chartered lodge. — Mellen, Acacia, 1855.

Under our constitution, lodges under dispensation are fully
authorized to admit members by affiliation. — Perkins, C. F. C
La., 1856.

LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION. 145

Ought lodges under dispensation to affiliate members ? We
fully concur in the reasoning of the Committee (Cal., 1856)
in favor of their being regarded lodges in the full meaning of
the word ; and yet we are satisfied of the position taken by
Brother Rockwell, (Ga.) and held with us, viz: that the
powers of a lodge under dispensation must depend, after all,
on the terms of the dispensation itself. This is self-evident,
and needs no argument. — Lawrence, C. F. C. Ga., 1856.

Full Powers. — As may be seen below, there is respectable
authority for claiming that lodges under dispensation are en-
titled to all the rights and privileges, for the time being, of a
chartered lodge, except a representation in Grand Lodge.

Hereby giving and granting them and their successors full
power and authority to convene as masons ; * * * also,
to make choice of a Master, Wardens and other office-bear-
ers, annually or otherwise ; * * * to receive and collect
funds for relief, * * * and in general to transact all mat-
ters relating to Masonry * * * for the term of one year. —
Extract from Dispensation to Columbian Lodge, 1795, by Grand
Lodge, Mass.

We agree with the editors of the Masonic Review, (Moore,)
and the Signet, (Mitchell,) that a lodge under dispensation
has all the powers, for a limited time, of a chartered lodge,
except those of electing a Master and Wardens, and being
represented in Grand Lodge. They may form and adopt by-
laws, admit adjoining members, make masons, try and sus-
pend or expel them, elect or appoint all officers, except the
Master and Wardens, dispose of their funds in purchasing
necessaries and in charities, and commission a delegate
representative or proxy to the Grand Lodge, to look after
their interests, &c. But such representative is not a member
of the Grand Lodge.— Hatch, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1852.

A lodge under dispensation has all the powers of a char-
tered lodge, for a limited time, except that of electing officers,
and being represented in Grand Lodge. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev ,
v., 150.

146 LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

A lodge working under dispensation, or warrant from the
Grand Master, is a regular and constitutional lodge, and not
merely a number of masons working after the manner of a
lodge ; it is not composed only of the Master and Wardens
named in the warrant, but of all brethren who affiliate with
it, and brothers may affiliate with, and candidates be admitted
members of such lodge, and the charter, when granted, is but
a continuance of the warrant, and does not create a new
lodge, although the existence of a lodge under dispensation
terminates at the end of the next communication after the
dispensation is issued, if not continued, or a charter granted.
Pike, C. F. C. of Ark, 1854. Res. Ark, 1854.

We are of opinion that a lodge working under a dispensa-
tion is as fully a lodge as one working under a charter. — Spec.
Com. La., 1856.

A lodge under dispensation is, to all intents and purposes,
a " regular lodge," and possesses, for the time being, all the
rights and privileges of lodges under charter, except the
right of representation in Grand Lodge. It has the power to
receive, try, and suspend or expel members, or non-affiliated
masons residing within its jurisdiction, and, consequently, a
brother who petitions for a dispensation to form a new lodge,
must not belong to any other lodge when he takes his seat in
the new one. — Mitchell, Sig. and Jour., April, 1855.

Representation in Grand Lodge. — Lodges under dispen-
sation are not entitled to representation in Grand Lodge.
This jt*» the oldest, and is the almost universal rule upon the
subject. In a very few American jurisdictions, the Master
and Wardens of such lodges are allowed, as a matter of court-
esy merely, a seat and voice, but not a vote, in Grand Lodge.
To entitle a lodge to full representation in Grand Lodge, it
must have been constituted, and its officers installed, under a
regular charter or warrant.

A lodge under dispensation is not entitled to representation
in Grand Lodge until a charter has been granted. — Herrick,
G. M. 111., 1856.

LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION. 147

A lodge under a dispensation is but a temporary and incho-
ate body, and is not entitled to representation in Grand Lodge.
—Cong. N. Y.

Masters and Wardens of lodges working under dispensa-
tion in this state * are authorized to participate in all the de-
liberations of this Grand Lodge, with the exception of voting.
— Res. N. H., 1856.

By courtesy, the petitioners of a lodge under dispensation
are permitted to take seats in Grand Lodge ; but are not per-
mitted to vote, they not being yet members of that body. —
Haswell, C. F. C. Vt, 1851.

Officers not entitled to vote or voice in Grand Lodge. — Res.
Mich., 1851.

Officers of a lodge working under dispensation are not en-
titled to seats as representatives in Grand Lodge. — Const. R. I.

Resolved, That delegates in attendance from lodges in the
territory working under dispensation, be permitted to take
seats in this body, and participate in its discussions.— Res.
Conv.for organizing Grand Lodge of Iowa, 1844.

Resolved, That all those brethren who represent lodges
under dispensation be allowed to take seats as members of
this Grand Lodge. — Wis. 1849. The resolution is in conflict
with the laws and usages of Masonry. — Parvin, C. F. C. Iowa,
1850.

We allow representatives of lodges under dispensation to
take seats in the Grand Lodge, (Iowa,) and to participate in
its deliberations, but in no instance to become members or
vote, or serve on committees, or hold office there. — Parvin,
C. F. C. Iowa, 1852.

Lodges under dispensation have no representation in Grand
Lodge.— Morris, Am. F. M., v., 61. Herrick, G. M. III., 1856.

By courtesy, the representatives of lodges under dispensa-
tion are permitted to sit in this Grand Lodge, except at the

* In the above state dispensations for new lodges only allow them to initiate
into the first degree.

148 LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

opening, or during an election, unless they are Past Masters,
which entitles them to be present ; but they are not entitled
as representatives to act or vote in the Grand Lodge. — Hatch,
C.F. C.ofN. F.,1851.

In the Grand Lodge of Missouri, 1854, a resolution was
adopted permitting " delegates from lodges under dispensation
to participate in debate."

Cannot be Represented until Constituted, and Officers
Installed. — A lodge cannot be represented in Grand Lodge
until it has been regularly constituted, and its officers installed.
The vote of the Grand Lodge, granting a charter, is not suf-
ficient to entitle it to such representation. (The issuing of a
commission does not, of itself, qualify a person to act as a
Justice of the Peace.) This we believe to be sound law, and
to have the support of the highest authority.

Motion (by Mackey) to allow officers of encampments just
chartered to vote, ruled out of order. — G. G. Enc, 1856. Very
properly ruled out of order. — C. "W . Moore. A similar motion
was made and rejected in the same body in 1847.

A chapter* until its officers are elected and installed under
its charter, is not entitled to be represented in Grand Chapter.
— Mellen in G. G. Chap., 1847. C. W. Moore, 1847.

The following resolution was ruled out of order by the G.
G. H. P. of the General Grand Chapter, in 1856 :

" Resolved, That the officers of the several chapters to which
charters have just been ordered, have a right to seats in this
G. G. Chapter, and a right to vote."

On motion, the delegates of lodges to which warrants had
been granted, were allowed to vote upon all questions before
the Grand Lodge, the same as other members. — Mich., 1849.

On motion, resolved, that the delegates of lodges under dis-
pensation be allowed one vote in the election. — 16.

Both these votes we consider entirely erroneous. — Hatch,
C. F. C. of-N. Y., 1850.

* For "chapter," read also " lodge ."— G. W. C.

LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION. 149

In the Grand Lodge of Illinois, 1851, charters were voted
to twelve lodges previously working under dispensation, and
their representatives were then "invited to take seats in
Grand Lodge as members," and did so.

Not entitled to vote until received warrant, and officers
been installed. May be allowed to speak to all questions, and
entitled to some mileage and per diem pay as members. — ■
Mich, 1854.

General Powers and Privileges. — Under this head we give
authorities that could not well be placed elsewhere. In de-
fining the general powers and privileges of a lodge under dis-
pensation, in any particular jurisdiction, reference should
always be had to the regulations and usage of that jurisdic-
tion, as by these such bodies must be governed.

Lodges under dispensation have full power to punish, by
suspension or expulsion, any of its members for unmasonic
conduct. — Anderson, G. M. 111., 1855. Grand Lodge do.

The original and sole object for granting dispensations was
to confer degrees. The brethren to whom the dispensation
is granted, remain still under the jurisdiction of the nearest
lodge to their respective residences, and by those lodges they
can be tried for masonic offenses. The dispensation is
alone to the petitioners ; they cannot add to their numbers. —
Mellen, C. F. C. Miss., 1854.

It is probably within the power of Grand Lodges to increase
the objects for dispensation. — lb.

Tour committee have grave doubts whether a lodge under
dispensation has any right to try a brother upon any charge
whatever. Such a lodge cannot elect officers, its officers can-
not be installed, it cannot affiliate members, or do any thing
that a regular chartered lodge can do, except to confer the
several degrees on candidates under the usual rules and reg-
ulations.— Sayre, C. F. C. Ala., 1854.

The officers of a lodge under dispensation cannot be dealt
with by the members of such lodge. — Iowa, 1858

150 LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

Lodges under dispensation have no authority- to elect
officers to be installed under the charter until after the lodge is
constituted. The officers to be first installed are those named
in the charter, — Anderson, G. M. 111., 1855. Grand Lodge do.

In case the Master of a lodge under dispensation dies, the
Senior Warden succeeds, as in chartered lodges ; though the
Grand Master may appoint to fill the vacancy. — lb.

A lodge under dispensation is but a temporary and incho-
ate body, and is not entitled to representation in the Grand
Lodge ; and those who work it do not forfeit their member-
ship thereby in any other lodge while it so continues, but
such membership is thereby suspended. — Res. Cal., 1855.

Brethren who work a lodge U. D. are liable to the several
lodges from which they hail, for lodge dues ; and those lodges
must pay dues for them to the Grand Lodge. — Res. Min., 1857.

A lodge under dispensation cannot make by-laws ; and
brethren made in a lodge under dispensation have not the
right of voting until regularly admitted to membership after
the lodge is chartered and constituted by the Grand Lodge. —
Douglass, G. M. Fla., 1851.

In Kansas, lodges IT. D. are allowed to admit members,
adopt by-laws, and elect officers. — Vide Const.

A lodge IT. D. cannot admit members, elect or install officers,
make laws, be represented, or its officers have seats in Grand
Lodge.— Gray, Miss., 1856.

No lodge under dispensation shall be permitted to hold a
public celebration on any masonic occasion whatever, unless
the consent of the Grand Master, or, in his absence, the Dep-
uty Grand Master, be first obtained. — Const. Neb.

A chapter under dispensation does not, in our opinion,
possess any power to try and expel a companion from the
fraternity. — C. W. Moore, 1845.

It is not necessary for a lodge under dispensation to initiate,
craft or raise any candidates to entitle it to a charter. — Min.,
1856.

LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION. 151

To form and open a lodge, after the manner of Free and Ac-
cepted Masons, and therein to make freemasons according to
the ancient customs, and not otherwise, is all the power con-
ferred by a dispensation. While in this state, not having
been constituted, and, therefore, not invested with the power
to elect officers, the Master cannot be installed. The brother
appointed to fill the office may nevertheless take the chair,
and discharge all the duties of presiding officer, without any
further special qualification. At the expiration of the term
for which the dispensation is granted, the brethren petition
for a charter ; if this be obtained, they are authorized to elect
their own Master and other officers. They are then regularly
constituted, and their officers duly installed by the Grand
Lodge. Neither of these acts can be done under a dispensa-
tion.— Gray, Com. Miss., 1853.

Our position is, that a lodge under dispensation can exer-
cise no power that is not expressly conferred, or necessary
to carry into effect such express power ; and where, as in In-
diana, the dispensation only authorizes those to whom it is
granted to meet, after the manner of Free and Accepted Ma-
sons, and initiate, pass and raise masons, this is all that they
can rightfully do. Where, as in New York, the dispensation
expressly gives them power to make masons, admit members,
and form a code of by-laws, they may do so. The only ques-
tion in such a case is as to the expediency of granting these
extra and (until lately, if not now) unusual powers. — Doug-
lass, C. F. C. of Fla., 1855.

A chartered lodge possesses all the ancient and inalienable
rights and privileges appertaining to a masonic lodge, while
a lodge under dispensation has just so many of those priv
ileges (not rights) as the Grand Lodge in its legislation
chooses to endow it with. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 137.

A lodge under dispensation is not in fact, nor can be prop-
erly called, a true and perfect lodge. It has no charter, nor
possesses any power, other than that expressed in the dis-
pensation, which is simply to open a lodge and make masons,
and that only for a limited time. They cannot be constituted

152 LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

as a lodge, nor their officers installed, nor elect members, nor
can they pass and raise candidates.* — C. F. C. N. H., 1858.

The opinion that it is not competent for a lodge under dis-
pensation to adopt a code of by-laws, is contrary to the prac-
tice in Vermont. — Com. Vt., 1858.

Such a congregation of masons possesses but few of the fea-
tures or constituent properties of a regular lodge. It is not
constituted ; the Master and Wardens are not installed ; they
are not members of the Grand Lodge, nor are they in any
collective capacity responsible or amenable to the Grand
Lodge, but only to the Grand Master, who may revoke their
dispensation at pleasure. They have no constitution, nor
can they make one, nor can they elect officers, exercise ma-
sonic discipline, or do any act or thing other than that they are
expressly authorized to do by the Grand Master, viz : to make
entered apprentices, pass and raise them. A lodge under dis-
pensation cannot admit members by affiliation, and it cannot
be legally empowered so to do, either by the Grand Master
or by the Grand Lodge.-^WiiniNG, C. F. C. of D. C, 1856.

The officers of a lodge under dispensation should not be
installed ; such lodges are not entitled to representation or
vote in Grand Lodge, and cannot elect officers. In all other
respects their rights, duties and privileges are the same as
chartered lodges. They may affiliate members, try, suspend
and expel members, and grant demits. — Res. Texas, 1852.

A lodge working under dispensation has the same rights
in reference to jurisdiction as a chartered lodge. — Hubbard,
Ohio, 1853.

A lodge under dispensation has the right to try its own
members for unmasonic conduct. But if members of another
lodge, from which they have not demitted, attach themselves
to a lodge working under dispensation, such may be pro-
ceeded against by the chartered lodge. — lb.

The dispensation authorizes the brethren to whom it is
granted, " to form and open a lodge, after the manner of An-

* That is, in that state.— G. W. C.

LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION. 153

cient Free and Accepted Masons, and therein to admit and
make masons." This we conceive to be the full extent of the
powers delegated to, or that can be legally exercised by, such
lodges.— C. W. Moore, 1849.

The presiding officers of lodges under dispensation are not
entitled to the rank of Past Master. — Res. Mich., 1851.

It is not essential that the Master should have passed the
oriental chair. — Mellen, Acacia, 1855.

A merely temporary lodge cannot make by-laws ; cannot
elect officers ; officers cannot be installed ; cannot admit mem-
bers ; persons made in are not members of; cannot do any
thing, except congregate, enter, pass and raise Freemasons. —
Mackey, P. M. X., 93.

A lodge under dispensation is, in Connecticut, at least, but
a temporary organization, and may never have a permanent
existence. — Storer, C. F. C. Conn., 1855.

We think that a lodge nnder dispensation cannot recom-
mend a petition for a new lodge. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 186.

A lodge under dispensation has no authority to recommend
a petition for a new lodge. — Anderson, 67. M. Ill, 1855.
Grand Lodge do.

A lodge under dispensation, being the creature of the Grand
Lodge, and itself in a state of probation, cannot properly

recommend the issuance of dispensations to new lodges

Res. Iowa, 1852.

Chapters working U. D. have not power to recommend
petitions for new chapters. — Res. Grand Chap. Texas, 1853.

Nearly every American Grand Lodge requires that all
petitions for a new lodge must be accompanied with the cer-
tified recommendation of the lodge nearest the place of the
proposed new lodge. In those jurisdictions having D. D. G.
Masters, the approbation of the District Deputy is usually
required in addition to the above. Several Grand Lodges
prescribe additional pre-requisites, as will be seen below.

The Grand Lodge of Mississippi requires the recommend-
ation of the two lodges nearest the proposed one. — Res. 1855.

154 LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

Kentucky requires the nearest lodge also to certify, that
the Master and Wardens recommended are qualified to confer
the first degrees in Masonry. — Res. 1857. Ditto Const. Kansas.
Ditto. Reg. III.

The Grand Lodge of Mississippi, in 1853, adopted a resolu-
tion forbidding the recommendation of a petition for a new
lodge, until the recommending lodge shall cause one or more of
the petitioners to come before it, and, in open lodge, satisfac-
torily exemplify the work and lectures in the three first degrees
in Masonry.

The first three officers named in a petition for a dispensa-
tion shall appear before, the lodge whose recommendation is
necessary, and exhibit their work in the three degrees ; and if,
in the judgment of said lodge, said officers are competent to
confer the degrees and impart the lectures, the said lodge
may recommend the petitioners for a dispensation, and not
otherwise.— Res. N. Y., 1857.

No dispensation or charter shall be granted to any set of
masons, unless the Master and Wardens named in the appli-
cation be first examined as to their proficiency in the three
degrees, by the Master and Wardens or lodge recommending
them, and that said examination shall not be considered suf-
ficient unless the entire ceremony of opening and closing the
lodge, with all the lectures of each degree, are fully and com-
pletely exhibited in open lodge, and such satisfactory exam-
ination be endorsed on the application. — Res. Fla., 1858.
Ark., 1853, (nearly verbatim.)

Before any subordinate lodge shall recommend any petition
for a new lodge, they shall require the brother named as
Master of said new lodge, or one of the Wardens, to appear
in open lodge, and exemplify the work in the three degrees
of Masonry to the satisfaction of the lodge. — Res. Ala., 1851.

This Grand Lodge will not grant a charter to a new lodge
unless the Grand Master or Grand Visitor certify that the
three first officers thereof are competent, and duly qualified to
perform the work required of them respectively, and are con-

LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION. 155

versant with the ancient charges and landmarks. — Res. Mich.
1855.

Petition must be accompanied with evidence that they
have, or can secure, a suitable place to hold their meetings. — ■
Res. do., '57.

In Iowa, the recommending lodge shall require the pro-
posed Master or one of the Wardens to appear and exemplify
the work in the three degrees ; and shall certify that the pe-
titioners have provided a suitable and safe lodge-room, and
that each petitioner is in possession of a regular demit, (if
the lodge of which he was last a member be in existence.) —
Res. 1852.

Recommending lodges must certify to the good moral
character of the petitioners ; that they are qualified to confer
the degrees and give the lectures properly ; that the proposed
location is favorable, and will not interfere materially with
any other lodge ; and that they have a suitable room for
meetings. — Res. Ind., 1854.

In England, the recommendation of the officers of a regular
lodge is required, unless there be a Provincial Grand Master
in the district or province, in which case his recommendation
is necessary.

In Ireland, the petition must be recommended by the Mas-
ters of three regular lodges adjacent to the place of the pro-
posed new lodge, and also by the Provincial Grand Master.

In Scotland, the recommendation of the two nearest lodges
and the Provincial Grand Master is required.

To all petitions for dispensations there shall be attached
the certificate of the Master of a chartered lodge, that the
Master named in the petition is competent to confer the three
degrees of Masonry. — Res. CaL, 1854.

Membership of Petitioners. — Whether or not the signers
of a petition for a new lodge must withdraw their member-
ship from their respective lodges, previous to signing the pe-
tition, is a question not yet conclusively settled. The reg-
ulations of some jurisdictions require such a withdrawal, and

156 LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

others do not. The weight of authority seems, however, tc
be adverse to such withdrawal, and, according to present
usage, in the absence of local regulations to the contrary, it
may be considered unnecessary for the petitioners for a new
lodge to withdraw from their respective lodges until a char-
ter is granted the new lodge. (This, however, was not the
ancient usage.) After a charter has been granted, they must
either withdraw from the one or the other, because a brother
cannot be a member of more than one lodge at the same time.

A member of a chartered lodge does not lose his member-
ship therein, nor sever himself from his rights, as well as ob-
ligations as such member, by joining in the organization, and
aiding in the work of a new lodge under dispensation, even
if he be one of the petitioners for such dispensation for a
lodge. The lodge under dispensation is working on trial
only, and may never be chartered. If the new lodge is char-
tered, then, as in other cases of like kind, no brother can be
a member of two chartered lodges at one and the same time.
—Hubbard, G. M. Ohio, 1851.

Those who work it (a lodge U. D.) do not forfeit their mem-
bership thereby in any other lodge while it so continues ;
but such membership is thereby suspended. — Consts. N. Y.
and Mm.

The petition must be accompanied with certificates from
the lodge or lodges to which they last belonged, or other
satisfactory evidence of the good standing of the petitioners,
and that they are not members of any lodge. — Const. Penn.

Before application can be made to the Grand Lodge, by
brethren already members of a lodge, for a charter to form a
new one, ihe applicants shall pay up all dues to their lodge,
and notify them in writing that they intend applying for a
charter to establish a new lodge. —Const. Va.

When master masons, who are members of lodges under
this jurisdiction, unite to form a new lodge, they shall not
lose their membership in the lodges to which they previously
belonged, until the charter for the new lodge is issued by the

LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION. 151

Grand Lodge, when their membership shall cease in the lodge
from which they hailed, and shall immediately begin in the
new lodge, unless they notify the new lodge to the contrary
before its constitution. — Const. Ga.

In the formation of a new lodge, a mason may hold his
membership in the number to which he belongs until the new
one be chartered, when it shall immediately cease. — Const.
D. C.

In Iowa, the petitioners must demit before petitioning, or
show that the lodge to which they last belonged is no longer
in existence. — Res. 1852.

The petitioners, if members of a chartered lodge or lodges
at the time of making an application for a dispensation, do
not forfeit, release or sever themselves from their rights or
obligations therein, until a charter is granted to them. — Hyam,
G. M. Cal, 1853.

AVhen a dispensation has been granted by this Grand
Lodge, the brethren signing the petition for the same shall
be considered as having regularly demitted from the lodge of
which they were members ; provided, that they shall have
paid all lodge dues. — Const. Ark.

" Are members of a lodge obliged to withdraw from member-
ship before signing a petition for a new lodge, or do they, by
the act of signing the petition^ become discharged from mem-
bership ?"

In reply to the above question, we, in the first place, call at-
tention to the fact that a mason can belong to but one lodge.
Secondly, the ancient regulation touching this point, provides
that, " when a lodge becomes thus numerous," that is, consists
of more than forty or fifty members, " some of the ablest mas-
ter workmen, and others under their direction, will obtain
leave to separate, and apply to the Grand Lodge for a war-
rant to work by themselves." Here it is distinctly stated
that they must " obtain leave to separate," so that we may
consider this point distinctly settled, so far as ancient usage
is concerned, and that leave must be obtained before they

158 LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

petition for the new lodge. The manner of obtaining leave
to withdraw is not specified in the ancient constitutions or
regulations, but is left to the lodge and the petitioners. The
question then is, what is necessary to satisfy the law requir-
ing leave to be first obtained ? We answer, in the first place,
that if the petitioners present their petition to their own
lodge for its approval, as the lodge nearest the locality of the
proposed new one, and the lodge approve of it, it at the same
time virtually grants them "leave to withdraw," because the
request is in reality not only that they consent to the forma-
tion of the new lodge, but that the petitioners be the ones to
form it, and a consent to either proposition is virtually a con-
sent to both, provided the contrary be not particularly speci-
fied. But if the prayer of the petition be not granted, their
membership remains as before. But in case either of the
petitioners be a member of a lodge whose consent is not thus
asked, then it appears to us plain that he must first apply to
his lodge for leave to withdraw, and then he may lawfully
petition for a new lodge. We are of opinion that in this latter
case, if the member in his application asks leave to withdraw
"for the purpose of petitioning " for the new lodge, and the pe-
tition for the new lodge is not granted, that his membership
remains good. — Chase, Mas. Jour., 1855.

The question whether the membership of a brother ceases
in the old lodge when he becomes a petitioner for a new
lodge, is attracting some attention. Now, as a number of
masons working under a dispensation is not a lodge, and may
never become one, as no charter may ever be given them, it
seems evident that the membership of the petitioners is not
changed, but that they remain members of the old lodge, and
subject to its regulations and discipline until the new lodge
is chartered, when they become members of it by signing its
constitution and by-laws. — C. F. C. of R. 1., 1852.

The C. F. C. of Connecticut, for 1855, " question the correct-
ness " of requiring a demit as a pre-requisite to signing a
petition for a dispensation.

The usage ir this state, and we believe generally, relative

LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION. 159

to brethren who petition for a dispensation for a new lodge,
is not to require them to demit from the old lodge until the
new lodge receives a charter. — Mellen, C. F. C. Miss., 1854.

The Deputy Grand Master of Georgia, in 1852, says that a
demit is not necessary to enable brethren to procure and act
under a dispensation to form a new lodge. The C. F. C. of
Maryland, in reviewing the above, say, " this is not correct
masonic law."

Your committee hold, that the vote of the lodge avouching
the moral character and masonic qualification of the brethren
named in the application for a new lodge, and recommending
the Grand Master to grant the prayer of their petition, is, to
all intents, equivalent to a vote granting them letters dismis-
sory from such lodge; and their acceptance of the boon
sought is a consummation of the transaction, provided such
new lodge be duly constituted. — Thrall, Com. Mas. Juris.
Ohio, 3855.

We hold to the doctrine that a petitioner for a dispensation
to open a new lodge neither loses his membership, nor is
forced to demit prior to signing, because the body formed
under the dispensation is not, strictly speaking, a lodge, but
merely an authorized assemblage of masons, permitted to
work temporarily, and for a limited period.

A mason, being a member of a lodge, and desirous of assist-
ing in the formation of a new one, should first obtain the con-
sent of his lodge ; if the petition be recommended by his
lodge, that is equivalent to a permission. His membership is
then suspended in his lodge until the new lodge receives a
charter, after which it ceases. But should the charter not be
granted, his membership in his former lodge revives. — C. F. C.
of La., 1851.

We do not think the membership of petitioners is sus-
pended at all ; nor that it is changed or affected by the fact
of petitioning, until the dispensation is granted. From the
date of the dispensation, according to the practice of some,
and from the date of organizing under the dispensation, ao

160 LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

cording to the practice of others, their membership ceases in
their old lodge, and they become members of the new one
under dispensation. This true date, we think, is the date of
organizing under the dispensation. — Hatch, C. F. C of N. F.,
1852.

In 1854, the Grand Lodge of Michigan adopted a resolution
declaring that it will not grant a charter to a new lodge,,
unless under the certificate of the Grand Master or Grand
Lecturer, that the three first officers thereof are competent
and duly qualified to perform the work required of them re-
spectively, and that they are conversant with the ancient
charges and landmarks.

A petitioner for a lodge to work under dispensation must,
when the dispensation expires, and a warrant is granted in-
stead, give notice to which lodge he intends to belong, or he
will be deemed a member of the new lodge. — Lewis, G. M. of
N. Y, 1858.

The Master of a warranted lodge may be Master of a
lodge under dispensation, and the same rule applies to other
lodge officers.*— Lewis, G. M. of N. Y, 1858.

Resolved, That the Grand Secretary is hereby instructed,
that, in addition to the pre-requisites heretofore necessary, he
shall require all petitioning brethren for a dispensation to de-
posit with him certificates of dismissal from the lodges of
which they were last members. — Conn., 1854.

We must be allowed to question the correctness of this
(above) course. — C. F. Ala., 1855.

The mere signing of a petition for a dispensation to a new
lodge, does not demit the signer from his lodge ; consequently,
dues are properly chargeable against him in the chartered
lodge, and not in the lodge under dispensation. — Wis., 1855.

In Indiana, petitioners for a new lodge are not required to
demit until on the issuance of a charter. — 1855.

* A special committee of six unanimously decided that the ahove decision
conllicted with the constitution, which suspends the membership of all who take
part in a lodge U. D., and, therefore, a Master could not lawfully preside in botb
Dodies.— G. W C.

LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION. 161

The act of joining in a petition for a dispensation for a new
lodge does not in any manner affect their relations or liabil-
ities as members of the lodges to which they are at present
attached. When the new lodge is chartered they are re-
quired to withdraw from their present lodge, or close their
their connection with the new lodge. — C. W. Moore, 1850.

Petitioning for a dispensation for a new lodge does not
sever connection in old lodge. — Rice, B. G. M. Ga., 1855.

The membership of petitioners, recommended as such by
their lodge, ceases in the old lodge the moment the new lodge
is constituted. — Com. Juris. Ohio, 1855.

The recommendation of a petition for a dispensation (by a
lodge) implies a consent for the transfer of such of its mem-
bers as may be named in the petition. — Hillyer, G. M. Miss.,
1855.

The act of recommending the petitioners for a new lodge is
tantamount to a permission to withdraw, and actually dis-
charges them from membership in that lodge. — C. Moore, 1848.
Ohio, 1848.

If a lodge working under a dispensation be a legal lodge,
(which we think will not be denied,) it must have members.
The individuals named in the dispensation compose its mem-
bers, and cannot, at the same time, be members of any other
lodge. — lb.

In all cases of granting dispensations for new lodges, the
applicants who shall be members of lodges other than that
recommending such application, shall first regularly withdraw
their membership from their respective lodges. — Ohio, 1848.

Petitioners for a lodge U. D. remain members of their old
lodge, and are subject to the payment of dues until the dis-
pensated lodge is chartered, when they should withdraw
from one or the other. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

Grand lodge dues should not be charged for members com-
posing a lodge under dispensation. — Ohio, 1854.

Their membership ceases in the one, and commences in the

162 LODGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

other, precisely when the new lodge is duly constituted.—
Ohio, 1855.

The certificates of demit of all brethren who shall petition
for a dispensation for a new lodge, shall be filed with said pe-
tition.— Res. Miss., 1854.

Not required to demit. Become regularly demitted from
the old lodge when the new one receives a charter. — Ander-
son, G. M. ML, 1855. Grand Lodge do.

The Master of a chartered lodge cannot unite in petition
for a new lodge, for that would necessarily carry with it the
resignation of his office.* — 16.

I consider it necessary to withdraw from a lodge before
signing a petition for a new one. — Moors, G. M. Mich., 1849.

Shall pay all their dues to their lodge, and give notice in
writing of intention to apply for dispensation. — Res. Mich.j
1851.

No demits accompanying said petition, we recommend
that no dmrter be granted. [Adopted.] — Mich., 1858.

Brethren who work a lodge under dispensation, are liable
to the several lodges from which they hail for dues. — Min.,
1857.

It seems to be generally admitted that a mason may become
attached to a lodge under dispensation without forfeiting his
membership in the chartered lodge. — Morris, Am. F. M., v., 12.

If a lodge under dispensation fails to receive a charter,
such of the members as did not demit when they signed the
petition for the dispensation, resume their former member-
ship.— Morris, Am. F. M., iv., 45.

* Strange doctrine, if the preceding paragraph is correct.— G. W. C

NON-AFFILIATED MASONS

A non-affiliated mason is one who is not a contributing
member of any lodge. It is now well settled that such
brethren are subject to the nearest lodge (or that in whose
jurisdiction they reside) for unmasonic conduct;* are not
entitled to charity from the lodge fund ; to visit any lodge ; to
join in masonic processions, or to masonic burial. They can-
not claim any of the benefits or privileges of the lodge organ-
ization; but are entitled, and subject, to all the rights and
privileges, claims and duties, belonging to them as individual
members of the fraternity.

Any mason who does not contribute to the funds, or belong
to some lodge, shall not be entitled to visit more than twice
while he so continues, or to join in processions, or receive
assistance or relief, or masonic burial. — Const. N. Y.

No brother made in a lodge beyond this jurisdiction, and
having been a resident here for three years without joining a
lodge, shall be entitled to masonic relief; nor shall his family
be entitled to apply therefor. — Const. Penn.

No master mason who shall live in the vicinity of a lodge
under this jurisdiction for one year, and who is able to pay
the dues required by said lodge, and shall neglect to affiliate,
(unless he shall be a member of a lodge under some other ju-
risdiction,) shall be allowed the right to visit, to assist at any
of the public ceremonies and processions of the order ; be en-
titled to masonic burial ; or to receive relief for himself or
family from the charity funds of the orders — Const. La.

Any demitted brother who does not unite with some other
* See "Lodges, Penal Jurisdiction."

164 NON-AFFILIATED MASONS.

lodge, as. well as all nonaffiliated brethren, shall not be en-
titled to any of the benefits of Masonry, such as the burial ser-
vice, uniting in masonic celebrations, laying corner-stones,
visiting lodges, &c. Nor shall they or their families have
any claims upon the fraternity for pecuniary aid, in case of
misfortune and distress. — Const. Wis.

Any mason who does not contribute to the funds, or belong
to some lodge, shall not be entitled to join in processions, to
receive assistance, or masonic burial. — Const. Min.

In Kentucky, a lodge may or may not bury a non-affiliated
mason, as it may elect, irrespective of his otherwise good
standing or his request.

Non-affiliated masons shall have no claim or right to
aid from the charity funds of this Grand Lodge, or its subor-
dinates ; nor shall a non-affiliated mason be permitted to visit
a lodge more than twice, without the unanimous consent of
the members present. — Const. Mo.

No brother residing in the province, and not affiliating with
some lodge, shall be entitled to the benefit of the benevolent
fund for himself or family, to masonic burial, nor to take part
in any masonic ceremony, public or private, nor entitled to any
masonic privilege whatever ; nor can he be permitted to visit
any one lodge in the town or place where he resides more
than once, during his secession from the craft. — Const. Ca.

No mason thus situated should be debarred the privilege
of presenting complaints against members of a lodge. — Com.
Iowa, 1848.

Non-affiliated master masons who refuse to contribute to
the support of the institution, unless prevented by disability,
by so doing, forfeit all the rights, privileges and benefits of
the order.— Res. Ill, 1850.

When a mason permanently withdraws his membership he
dissevers all connection between himself and the lodge organ-
ization of the order. He divests himself of all the rights and
privileges which belong to him as a member of that organ-
ization. Among these rights are those of visitation, pecu-

NON-AFFILIATED MASONS. 165

niary aid, and masonic burial. Whenever he approaches tLe
door of the lodge, he is to be met in the light of a profane.
But from the well-known maxim of " once a mason, always a
mason," it follows that a demitted brother cannot by such de-
mission divest himself of all his masonic responsibilities to
his brethren, nor be deprived of their correlative responsi-
bility to him. He is still bound by certain obligations, of
which he cannot, under any circumstances, divest himself,
and by similar obligations are the fraternity bound to him.
Of these are such as secrecy, aid in the hour of pressing
danger, and reverence and respect for a brother's family. —
Mackey.

This Grand Lodge hereby instructs its subordinate lodges
not to grant relief to any applicant, out of the lodge funds,
unless he produces evidence of being a member of some reg-
ular lodge, or satisfactorily accounts for the absence of such
evidence, or assigns sufficient reasons for not being a mem-
ber of some regular lodge. — Res. Texas, 1854.

When a non-affiliated mason applies to adjoin a subordinate
lodge, and is rejected, such rejected mason shall have the
right to demand an investigation ; and if, upon such investiga-
tion, it shall appear that no objection exists against him suf-
ficient to affect his masonic standing, or if an investigation'
shall be refused by the lodge so rejecting him, he shall not
be liable to the masonic deprivations provided in section
fifty-one of the constitution. — Res. N. Y., 1855.

Resolved, That all subordinate lodges be forbidden the giv-
ing of masonic relief to any who shall not, to the satisfaction
of such lodge, have proved themselves regularly affiliated
masons. — lb.

Xo lodge within the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge shall,
more than once, admit as a visitor any resident mason who is
not a member of some lodge ; and no resident mason who has
remained, or shall remain, non-affiliated more than one year,
shall be allowed to participate in any public procession or
ceremony; nor shall any such, nor their widows or orphaiis,
be entitled to, or receive any benefit whatever from, any

166 NON- AFFILIATED MASONS.

lodge. All such non-affiliated masons being regarded as in
the light of profanes, not known to the fraternity in any of its
organized forms. — Res. B. C, 1856.

A non-affiliated mason, who has not been excused from be-
coming a member of a lodge, (by the subordinate lodge
in whose jurisdiction he resides,) shall not be entitled to join
in any masonic procession, or be entitled to masonic burial, or
to any pecuniary aid from a lodge. — Res. Va., 1856.

No master mason who, for the period of six months, shall
reside in the vicinity of a subordinate lodge, and shall neglect
to affiliate himself therewith, shall be permitted to visit any
lodge under the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, be entitled
to masonic burial, or receive relief from the charity fund of
the order, or allowed to assist at any public ceremonies or
processions of the fraternity. — Res. N. C, 1855.

Demitted and non-affiliated brethren who continue to reside
for the space of six months in the vicinity of a lodge, without
joining, or applying -to join the same, have no right to visit a
lodge, unless by consent of the same, with or without terms ;
nor to relief from the lodge ; nor to join her local proces-
sions ; nor to masonic burial. — Res. Ark., 1852.

Upon a demand being made upon us under any of the spe-
cific obligations, the question should not be, is he a member
of any subordinate lodge ? but, is he a mason ? and one of good
standing ? Nor will it do to pronounce him unworthy in con-
sequence of his position as a non-affiliated mason ; for this
demitting or withdrawal has been done by and with the com
sent of his brethren, acting in the capacity of a just and
legal lodge, under the constitution, rules and regulations of
the Grand Lodge, under which the same may be held. The
question ought, therefore, to be transferred from the propo-
sition to impose restrictions and disability upon non-affiliated
masons, to that of the right of a subordinate lodge to grant
demits to its members, unless for the purpose of joining some
other lodge ; and even then we are unprepared to concede
the legitimate power of the Grand Lodges to establish a reg
ulation forbidding its subordinates from granting demits

NON-AFFILIATED MASONS. 167

Even conceding the power, we should consider it an unwiso
policy, under existing circumstances, so to do. — Com. Juris.
Va., 1855.

None but affiliated masons, who regularly pay their annual
dues to the subordinate lodge to which they belong, shall
hereafter, in case of death, be buried with masonic honors ;
and neither are they, nor their families, entitled to masonic
charity. — Res. Ala., 1854.

The Grand Lodge of Georgia, in 1855, by an amendment to
its constitution, declared that masons non-affiliated for twelve
months, shall not be permitted to visit any lodge, nor entitled
to any of the privileges or benefits of Masonry.

The rights and responsibilities of a non-affiliated mason are
fixed. His duties and obligations remain the same, in every
particular, excepting those which necessarily spring from his
connection with an organized lodge. He is morally and so-
cially bound to render, not only his aid and assistance on all
proper occasions, and at proper times, but is entitled to aid
and assistance, when he asks for it in the proper and conven-
tional way. He may not be strictly entitled to demand pecu-
niary relief out of the lodge funds, but where is the rule or
principle to be found which will cut him off from all the
rights and privileges of a Master? Eights and duties are
reciprocal, and so long as he continues a mason, just so long
will his general immunities remain. — Daniel, C. F. C. Miss.,
1857.

Our position is, that by virtue of his initiation, the candi-
date is received into full membership in the fraternity, and is
invested with all those general privileges, and becomes enti-
tled to all those general benefits, which were possessed and
enjoyed by members of the order, before the organization of
private lodges as fixed and permanent bodies, governed by
special and local rules. These privileges and benefits we
hold to be irrevocable. He inherits them by virtue of in-
itiation, and they entitle him, until forfeited by his own act,
to the individual friendship, protection and relief of his

168 NON-AFFILIATED MASONS.

brethren, wherever he may sojourn on the face of the broad
world. This is ancient Freemasonry, and it is universal Free-
masonry. * * * The lodge is to him as a private body.
If he contributes nothing to its support, he has no claim upon
its privileges, as a lodge. Though he has no claim (if non-af-
filiated) upon the private charity fund of the lodge, or to ma-
sonic burial, yet he, his widow and orphans, have an irresist-
ible claim upon every individual brother of the craft, for such
relief and protection as their necessities may require, so long
as he sustains a character for sobriety and honor. — C. W.
Moore.

Resolved, That all non-affiliated masons within this jurisdic-
tion be* summoned to present themselves at the lodge nearest
their respective places of abode, and affiliate with said lodge,
or show good cause for the contrary ; and that all those who,
being duly summoned, refuse to affiliate, or show cause for
the contrary, ought to be regarded as unworthy of our masonic
charities.— Res. Cal., 1854.

Non-affiliated masons who refuse to contribute to the sup-
port of the institution, unless prevented by disability, do, by
so doing, forfeit all the rights, privileges and benefits of the
order.— Res. Cal, 1852.

I take the ground, that every mason living in a state of
voluntary non-affiliation, ipso facto, disfranchises himself of all
the rights and benefits of Masonry, by a continued and volun-
tary violation of the constitution of Masonry, which says :
" Every brother ought to belong to some regular lodge." —
Dove, Va., 1855.

No master mason who, for six months, shall reside in the
vicinity of a lodge, and neglect to affiliate therewith, or pay
dues to, shall be permitted to visit any lodge under this
jurisdiction ; be entitled to masonic burial ; to receive relief
from the charity fund of the order; or allowed to assist

at any public ceremonies or processions of the fraternity

Res. Ind., 1854.

It is my order that all non-affiliated within your jurisdiction

NON-AFFILIATED MASONS. 169

be requested to apply for membership in some lodge in their
vicinity, before [date] next. That all such as do not petition
for membership, and all whose applications may be rejected,
be required to pay dues. That all who remain unaffiliated,
and do not pay dues within [days], be summoned to appear at
the next meeting, and show cause why they should not bo
suspended. No cause will be valid but indigence. Excuse
no one who is able to pay. If any brother is not excused, and
refuses or neglects to pay his dues, it is your duty to suspend
him, and report the same to Grand Lodge. — Circular order
G. M. III., (Bosk,) 1858.

Non-affiliated masons should not be debarred the privilege
of presenting complaints against members of a lodge. — Iowa,
1848.

A demit is simply a withdrawal from the special duties of a
lodge. It releases a mason from — 1. A regular attendance
upon lodge meetings. 2. General obedience to the by-laws.
3. Attendance upon masonic processions. 4. The payment
of lodge dues. It deprives him of — 1. All benefits from the
lodge fund. 2. The privilege of referring any difficulties
he may have with a brother mason to the lodge for adjudica-
tion. 3. Masonic burial, save at the option of the lodge. 4.
The right to visit masonic lodges or to join in masonic pro-
cession, save by special courtesy. But it leaves him subject
— 1. To the general supervision which the lodge exercises
over the morals of all masons within its jurisdiction. 2. To
be called upon special summons. 3. To the full force of all
his masonic obligations. And it leaves in undisputed posses-
sion of — 1. A claim for aid or for counsel and advice upon
individual masons, wherever dispersed. 2. The same claim to
accrue to his widow and orphans after his decease. A sum-
ming up of these points will show that demitted masons sus-
tain the same relationship to the order as affiliating masons, but
are freed from the peculiar relationships which bound them
to the lodge. Were there no lodges, all would be non-affiliat-
ing masons, as happened in Urge districts during the anti-
masonic difficulties in 1826-36. Were the ancient practice of
8

170 NON-AFFILIATED MASONS.

emergent lodges to be revived * the distinction between af-
filiating and non-affiliating members would be lost. — Rob.
Morris.

If a non-affiliated brother will not affiliate himself with
some lodge, the Grand Lodge may demand dries from him,
and if he will not pay, may debar him the privilege of visit-
ing its subordinates, and withhold from him the charities o
the Grand Lodge, but it cannot suspend him from the rights
and privileges of Masonry. — Parvin, C. F. C. Iowa, 1848.

A non-affiliated mason has not a right to prefer a charge in
the lodge against another non-affiliated mason. — Morris, Am.
F. M., ii,, 15. A non-affiliated mason can prefer charges only
through the Grand Lodge. — lb., iii., 105.

I am clearly of opinion that masons who belong to no
lodge, ought not to have a vote in a lodge, on any question. —
Bierce, Mas. Rev., vii., 81.

Resolved, That any chapter under the jurisdiction of this
Grand Chapter, is hereby prohibited from conferring the
chapter degrees on an unaffiliated mason. — Ga., 1856.

"Resolved, That no non-affiliated master mason ought to
receive the chapter degrees, and that every royal arch mason
under this jurisdiction ought to be an affiliated member of
come Master's lodge."— Gr. Chap. Vt, 1857.

Brethren who have never been, or who have ceased to be,
affiliated, have not the same claims upon lodges that are con-
ceded to contributing members. Such brethren have not
good claim upon the charity fund of the lodges. * * * *
Non-affiliated brethren are not entitled to masonic funeral hon-
ors. They may claim the right to join in public processions
on the festival days of the fraternity, but not on local occa-
sions, when the procession is limited to the members of a pri-
vate lodge and their invited brethren. — C. W. Moore, F. M.
Mag., vi., 321.

Any master mason within the jurisdiction of this Grand

* It is not two centuries since chartered lodges originated. Previously to that
time, masons could meet in any retired place, and make masons of worthy appli-
cants by inhere! t right.

NON-AFFILIATED MASONS — RlbHT OF VISIT, ETC.. Ill

Lodge, who shall neglect or refuse to pay the ordinary lodge
dues, shall be deprived of all the rights, benefits and priv-
ileges of the lodges; that is to say, the right to visit and
associate with the regular members in the lodge-hall. The
right to ask and demand charity or pecuniary aid from the
lodge or its funds, for himself or family. The right to join or
move in masonic processions. The right to a masonic burial.
Provided, however, that any such master mason who shall
apply for membership in the lodge, and be rejected, or who
shall obviously be unable to pay dues, shall not be subject to
this resolution. — Res. Miss., 1855.

Not Entitled to Visit Lodges.

As early as 1733, (which was within sixteen years of the
first organization of lodges and Grand Lodges, as at present
constituted.) the right of visitation was denied to non-affiliated
masons, and the privilege restricted. It is well settled that
such brethren are not entitled to the privilege, and that the
Grand Lodge may grant or withhold it, at pleasure.

No mason, not a member of some subordinate lodge, shall
be allowed to visit the same lodge, in the place where he
resides, more than twice, without the permission of the Mas-
ter or vote of the lodge. — Consts. Mass. and Wis.

Nor can a resident of any town, village or city, where there
is a lodge, claim a right to be admitted as a visitor more than
twice, unless he is a member of some subordinate lodge. —
Const. N. Y.

A brother who is not a member of a lodge, shall not be
permitted to visit any lodge under this jurisdiction more than
once. — Const. Venn.

No brother who is a resident, shall be allowed to visit a
lodge more than once, without becoming a member of some
regular lodge under this jurisdiction. — Const. S. C.

No lodge shall admit any resident mason, not a member of
some lodge, to visit said lodge more than three times. — Const
D.C.

172 NON-AFFILIATED MASONS — TAXATION OP.

Nor shall any permanent resident non-affiliated mason be
permitted to visit any one lodge in this jurisdiction more
than three times while he remains thus non-affiliated. — Const.
Minn.

No non-affiliated mason can be allowed to visit any lodge
while any member of that lodge objects. — Anderson, G. M.
111., 1855. Grand Lodge do.

No master mason, not a contributing member to any lodge
within this Grand Lodge jurisdiction, shall, without invitation
from the Master or a Warden, be allowed to visit the same
lodge more than twice, unless he join some regular lodge. —
Const. Md.

No brother that lives within or about this town (that is not
a member of this lodge) shall be admitted as a visitor, before
he has signified his desire of being a member and paying his
quarterage, or else make it appear that he is actually a mem-
ber of a regular lodge, unless by dispensation of the Master
and Wardens. — By-law o/"1733.

A non-affiliated mason loses the general right to visit
lodges, or to walk in masonic processions. — Mackey U. M. L.,
xvii., 295.

No non-affiliated mason, under this jurisdiction, shall be
allowed to visit any lodge under this jurisdiction more than
three times, unless he shall apply to the lodge nearest to
where he resides for membership. Provided, That if a mason
shall apply to the lodge nearest his residence, for affiliation,
and shall be rejected, he shall not be denied any of the priv-
ileges of a mason in good standing. — Res. Texas, 1854.

No mason residing within the jurisdiction of a lodge shall
visit the same more than three times without becoming a
member thereof, except sojourners, unless they be members
in good standing of some lodge in this jurisdiction. — Res.
Mich., 1855.

Any master mason who shall refuse or neglect, for the space
of twelve months, to become a member of some lodge within
this jurisdiction, shall not be permitted to visit any lodge

NON-AFFILIATED MASONS — TAXATION OF. 173

within this jurisdiction. — Const. Ga., 1855. Same in Nebras*
ka, except the time prescribed is six months. — Res. 1858.

Taxation of. — The right of a Grand Lodge to tax non-
affiliated masons, for any purpose or object, has been, and
still is, unsettled. Though much may be said on the other
side of the question, we are clearly of opinion that such right
does not exist.

Some Grand Lodges require an annual tax to be paid by
all masons within their jurisdiction, on pain of suspension or
expulsion. Your committee doubt whether, on refusal of a
mason to comply with said requisition, the lodge have the
power to enforce their edicts without a hearing and trial. —
Has well, C. F. C. Vt., 1849.

Resolved, That it is inexpedient for this Grand Lodge to
adopt any regulation to compel masons who are not members
of any Grand lodge, to pay a tax for the support of the insti-
tution, or to require such masons to unite with lodges, con-
trary to their inclination, or against the dictates of their own
judgment.— Res. N. Y., 1848.

I doubt the propriety or policy of taxing non-affiliated
masons, under penalty of suspension or expulsion for failure
to pay.— G. 31. of N. C, 1847.

We have always dissented from the action of those Grand
Lodges that have required a tax of non-affiliated brethren, for
any purpose. Especially have we objected when expulsion
has been made the penalty of non-payment of the tax. Such a
regulation is neither legal, politic nor just. — C. W. Moore, 1849.

It is an innovation upon the ancient regulations, to tax non-
affiliated masons. — Del. 1855.

That cannot be charity which compels a mason to pay
dues.— King, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1855.

TVe do not hold to the right of taxing non-affiliated masons,
nor do we believe it right to do it. — Blackemer, C. F. C. if
N. C, 1851.

After a careful examination of the authorities, I cannot deny

174 NON-AFFILIATED MASONS — TAXATION OF.

to any man the right of withdrawing, whensoever he pleases.
* * * If, then, he has a right to withdraw, it clearly fol-
lows that we have no right to tax him, which is only one
mode of inflicting a fine or penalty for an act, the right to do
which we have conceded. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 291.

The object of Masonry never was to extort, nolens vokn%
money from its votaries. Such are not its principles or teach-
ings.—C. F. C. ML, 1847.

L lodge or Grand Lodge has not the right to suspend or expel
a mason from all the benefits of Masonry for failing to pay a
levy in form of a tax or contribution, if his moral standing
remains otherwise unimpeached. A mason cannot be de-
prived of his general privileges and rights for a violation of
a local or lodge regulation, unless such violation involves
his general obligations to the fraternity. — Gray, Miss. Am.
F. M., iii., 125.

Masons not members of any lodge, and residing in the
jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, shall pay into the grand
treasury the same dues as are required of the subordinate
lodges for each member, and for non-compliance, shall not be
permitted to visit any lodge in this jurisdiction more than
once. — Const. Iowa, 1844. This measure seems to us too just
to need defense. — Parvin, C. F. C. Iowa, 1852.

The Grand Lodge of Louisiana (1847) approved the prac-
tice of taxing non-affiliated masons, or debarring them the
privilege of visiting the lodges under its jurisdiction. The
Grand Lodge of Alabama (1847) disapproved of the practice.

Masters of lodges (when two exist in the same place, this
rule shall be enforced by the oldest lodge,) are positively
enjoined to require non-affiliated master masons under their
jurisdiction, to pay lodge and Grand Lodge dues; and in
default of such payment being made, (under the same regula-
tions as are applicable to members,) all such non-conforming
brothers shall be promptly declared by said subordinate
lodge to have forfeited, under the jurisdiction of this Grand
Lodge, all the rights and privileges of masons, and be so

N0N- AFFILIATED MASONS — TAXATION OF. 175

returned to the Grand and all Subordinate Lodges : Provided,
that this regulation shall not apply to those who may have
applied for, and been denied, membership in such subordinate
lodge ; and provided, further, that the non-affiliant may elect,
before service of summons is had, the lodge to which he will
pay his dues. — Const. Iowa.

We think that a Grand Lodge has a right to pass a law
taxing non-affiliated masons, but that a subordinate lodge has
not such a right. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 59.

Assessing dues upon non-affiliated masons, is in accordance
with the soundest principles of Masonry. — C. Moore, Mas.
Rev., vii., 191.

Every lodge shall be required to collect of every unaffiliated
freemason, residing within this state, who shall visit said lodge
while at work, a visiting fee equivalent to one-fourth of the
annual dues required by its by-laws to be paid by a member
thereof. — Const. Ga.

A lodge can compel a demitted brother, living within its
jurisdiction, to pay dues, and on his refusal or failure +» &*
so, can suspend or expel him. — Hubbard, Ohio. 1 pK"'

CANDIDATES.

JURISDICTION OVEE.

The jurisdiction of a lodge extends throughout the limir*!
of the town in which it is located, and half-way to the nearest
lodge in adjoining towns where there is no lodge ; except tha*
it cannot extend beyond the line of the state.

A lodge cannot confer the degrees upon a candidate who
resides nearer some other lodge, (with the above exceptions,)
without the consent of such other lodge ; nor upon a candi-
date who resides in another state, without consent of the sub-
ordinate lodge within whose jurisdiction he resides, and of
the Grand Lodge or Grand Master of such state.

Two or more lodges located in any one town or city, hold
concurrent jurisdiction, under the same restrictions as above.
We are of opinion that a Grand Master, or Grand Lodge, has
not the right to allow any lodge to confer degrees upon a can-
didate who belongs to the jurisdiction of another lodge, with-
out the consent of the latter.

No lodge shall, unless by dispensation, initiate any candi-
date, when there is a lodge, under this jurisdiction, nearer
his residence than the one to which he applies ; except sea-
men, or where two or more lodges are held in the same town
or place, in which case he may apply to either. — Const. Md.

All applications for initiation shall be made to the lodge in
the town where the petitioner resides, if there be a lodge in
such town ; but if there be none, then he shall apply to the
lodge nearest his residence. And no person residing in a
town where there is a lodge, shall be initiated in any other
town, without the written consent and approbation of th .
Master and Wardens of that lodge. — Const. Mass.

CANDIDATES— JURISDICTION OVER. 17T

No lodge shall act upon the petition of an applicant for the
degrees, whose residence is nearer some other lodge, unless
by written sanction of such lodge, or of the Grand Lodge of
the state from which he hails. — Const. N. C.

No resident of this state shall be permitted to take his
degrees in any lodge under this jurisdiction, unless it be in
the lodge nearest his usual place of residence, without special
dispensation ; provided this rule shall not apply to residents
in the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael, who may be
admitted to any of the Charleston lodges. — Const. S. C.

No candidate shall be entered, passed, or raised, in any
other lodge than that nearest his usual residence, without a
recommendation from the lodge or lodges held nearest the
residence of said candidate. — Const. Ga.

All applications for initiation, degrees, or membership, must
be made to the lodge most convenient to the residence of the
applicant, (lodges in the city of New Orleans excepted.) —
Const. La.

No candidate shall be received in any lodge but the one
nearest his residence : Provided he may be received in any
other lodge by vote of said nearest lodge ; and provided, fur-
ther, that in any city or town, any lodge therein may receive
an applicant resident in said city or town. — Consts. Ohio and
Indiana.

No petition for initiation shall be received by any lodge
under this jurisdiction from a person residing nearer some
other lodge, without the consent of the Master and Wardens
of the lodge nearest his residence. — Const. Wis.

No lodge shall receive and act upon the petition of an
applicant foi* initiation or admission, whose residence may be
nearer some other lodge under this jurisdiction, without the
consent of such nearest lodge. — Consts. Iowa and Missouri.
Res. Tenn., 1857. Tannehill, 1851.

Resolved, That it be the decision of this Grand Lodge, that
no subordinate lodge can, in any case, make a mason of a
person residing within the proper bounds or jurisdiction of
8*

118 CANDIDATES — JUEISDICTION OYER.

any other subordinate lodge, (the location of the candidate
and circumstances of the case being duly considered,) with-
out a dereliction from masonic usage and proper courtesy
due to their brethren, until the initiating lodge shall receive,
officially certified, the consent and approbation of the sister-
lodge, and the same be entered upon the records. — New York,
1851.

No candidate shall be received in any lodge out of the
county in which he resides, if there is a regular working
lodge in such county, unless with the unanimous consent
thereof. — Const. Neb.

We understand the usage to be, that the application shall
be made to the lodge nearest the residence of the petitioner;
and if he be received by any other lodge, that lodge exceeds
its jurisdiction, infringes on the rights of another, and for-
feits the fee to the lodge within whose jurisdiction the
candidate resides. — C. W. Mooke, 1844.

A lodge shall not ballot for, admit, or initiate any person
not a resident in the town, village, or neighborhood in which
such lodge meets, until due inquiry shall have been made of
such lodge or lodges as may exist in the neighborhood of his
residence. — Const. Ireland.

The lodge nearest a candidate's residence has the rightful
jurisdiction over him, and he can be admitted elsewhere only
by obtaining its consent. — Hillyer, G. M. Miss., 1855.

The air-line, and not the road, should govern the question
of jurisdiction. — lb.

No lodge shall act upon the petition of an applicant for
initiation or membership, whose residence is nearer another
lodge under this jurisdiction, unless by consent of such
nearer lodge. — Const. Kansas.

No lodge ought to initiate any candidate, unless he actually
resides nearer it than to any other lodge, unless upon recom-
mendation of such lodge, or its principal officers. — Res. Ohio,
1828.

It is wrong, improper, and unmasonic for any lodge to ini-

CANDIDATES JURISDICTION OVER. 179

tiate persons residing in the jurisdiction of another lodge. — ■
Res. Miss., 1841. Such a practice is manifestly improper, and
at variance with the fundamental rules of the order. — Ohio,
1842. Highly improper, and contrary to masonic law and
usage, unless by permission of the lodge holding jurisdiction.
— Ohio, 1854.

If any lodge initiate, advance, or admit to membership any
person who resides in the jurisdiction of another lodge, with-
out its consent, the Grand Master shall arrest the charter or
dispensation of such lodge. — Res. hid., 1852.

Lodges shall not receive a petition for initiation from an
applicant who lives nearer another lodge, without the unani-
mous consent of such other lodge, at a stated meeting. —
Reg. Ill

A master mason, not a member of any lodge, may join any
lodge that chooses to receive him. — Res. Mich., 1848.

This Grand Lodge has no power to require any lodge to
initiate, pass, or raise any candidate. — Mich., 1857.

A person transient in his calling, but residing in this state
a large portion of his time, may be initiated here. — Swigert,
G. M. Ky., 1858.

It is contrary to the by-laws of this Grand Lodge for a
lodge to initiate a candidate who resides in the jurisdiction of
another lodge. — Conn., 1797.

The nearest lodge has the exclusive right to receive and
act on petitions for initiation. —Ark., 1851. Must apply to
the nearest lodge, or obtain its consent to apply to some other
particular lodge. — Ark., 1853.

A lodge has the right of selecting its own members, with
which the Grand Lodge cannot interfere. — Mackey, P. M. L.,
101.

By the concurrent authority of all the Grand Lodges in
this country, every lodge is forbidden to initiate any per-
son whose residence is nearer to any other lodge. — Mackey,
P. M. L., 232.

180 CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OVER.

The Master of a lodge cannot take a candidate with him to
another lodge, and confer the degrees upon himtheie. — Mor-
ris, Am. F. M., iii., 185.

The word " State," in the Constitution of the Grand Lodge,
(Mass.,) is to be understood as referring to the States of this
Union, and not to foreign countries. "Being a resident" is
to be understood in the sense of a " fixed or legal residence,"
and does not apply to one who is only a temporary resident
or sojourner. The practice has been, in this state, to confer
the degrees on candidates who are subjects of the English
government, when found worthy and well qualified. — Randall,
G. M. Mass., 1854.

From another State. — The jurisdiction of a lodge over can-
didates for the degrees, does not extend beyond the bound-
ary-line of the state in which it is located, (if there be a
Grand Lodge in such adjoining state,) and it cannot confer
degrees upon residents of such other states, without permis-
sion from the lodge and Grand Lodge having jurisdiction.

The conferring of masonic degrees by lodges under the
jurisdiction of one Grand Lodge, upon candidates residing
within the jurisdiction of another Grand Lodge, is improper,
and not according to common usage. — Res. Vt, 1855.

In 1852, a lodge in Massachusetts was censured by the
Grand Lodge, for conferring the degrees on a resident of New
Hampshire ; and assured that a repetition of the offense would
operate as a forfeiture of their charter. — Vide Pro. Mass., 1852.

Resolved, That lodges in adjoining states have permission
to receive and act upon petitions from applicants residing in
this state, where there is no lodge convenient to the residence
of the applicant, upon their obtaining permission of the lodge
in whose jurisdiction the applicant resides; and that the sub-
ordinate lodges in this state be required to conform to the
same rule in receiving petitions from other states. — Ky.

Resolved, That all subordinate lodges in this jurisdiction,
located on the line of states, be, and they are hereby, directed
not to initiate any person who lives in any other state, with-

CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OVER. 181

out first obtaining the consent of the Grand Master of the
state in which the candidate resides, and also the W. Master
of the subordinate lodge under whose jurisdiction said candi-
date resides, — Mich., 1858.

This is as it should be.— C. F. C. III., 1858.

Your committee believe this question to be well settled,
that in all cases men should be made masons in the state in
which they reside.— C. F. C. of R. I., 1850.

The power of a subordinate lodge in one state, to initiate,
pass, and raise a non-resident of that state, has frequently
been exercised. The right to do so has not, within my knowl-
edge, been questioned, or considered as violating any of the
landmarks or principles of Freemasonry. — Head, G. M. Del.,
1854.

The advice of the Grand Master of Delaware is believed to
be contrary to the common practice of American Grand
Lodges. To be sure, we do not recollect any ancient regula-
tion which prohibits the initiation of candidates from with-
out the jurisdiction of a particular lodge or Grand Lodge ;
but it has been so long and so universally the custom, in this
country, to consider the jurisdiction of a Grand or Subordinate
lodge as sovereign and complete within its territorial limits,
that a departure from this principle has come to be viewed as
an infringement on vested rights. — Storer, C. F. C. of Conn^
1855.

No lodge under this jurisdiction shall recognize as a regular-
made mason, a resident of this state, who may, during a tem-
porary absence therefrom, receive the degrees in Masonry
without the consent of the lodge under whose jurisdiction he
may reside.- -Res. Texas, 1854 ; and Mo., 1852.

In the opinion of this Grand Lodge, and in accordance with
her established practice, the jurisdictional limits of each
American Grand Lodge should be commensurate with the
political boundaries of the state or territory in which such
Grand Lodge is located ; and the several Grand Lodges are
fraternally requested to prohibit the initiation, by their sub-

182 CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OVER.

ordinates, of candidates from without their own state or terri.
tory. — Res. Conn., 1856.

This Grand Lodge, having long since recognized the prin-
ciple that no man shall be initiated into the mysteries of our
order, except in the lodge nearest his place of residence ;
(unless by the proper permission ;) and having, by an estab-
lished regulation, taken care to avoid infringing upon the
jurisdictional rights of others, will not tolerate that its own
be invaded ; and it is, therefore, ordered, that no lodge sub-
ordinate to the Grand Lodge of California, shall admit or
receive to masonic communication, in any form whatever, any
person who, being at the time a resident of this state, has
received, or claims to have received, the degrees of Masonry
from any source beyond the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge,
without proper permission from the lodge nearest his place
of residence. Provided, however, that any mason thus irreg-
ularly made, may be healed by such lodge, after a petition for
that purpose shall have been presented and acted upon in the
manner prescribed for initiation, and by a unanimous ballot.
— Res. CaL, 1855.

This Grand Lodge hereby forbids the subordinate lodges
within its jurisdiction to initiate, pass, or raise any individual
residing within the jurisdiction of another Grand Lodge,
excepting such as present a recommendation for that purpose,
unanimously adopted, at a regular meeting, by the lodge
nearest the residence of the petitioner. — Res. Conn., 1851.

Some of the lodges in this state have occasionally admitted
residents of other states to the mysteries of Masonry. I am
clearly of opinion that, as a mere question of power, the
Grand Lodge and the fraternity of the state are enabled to do
so without an infringement of the ancient landmarks. But I
am also clearly of opinion that it is a power which, if exer-
cised at all, should only be exercised on very unusual and
extraordinary occasions. — Wbllard, G. M. of N. Y., 1850.

In 1855, the Grand Lodge of New Jersey passed a resolu-
tion requiring the Grand Master to request the Grand Lodges
of New York and Pennsylvania to prohibit thsir subordinate

CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OVER. 183

lodges from entertaining petitions from persons residing in
that state, without the consent of the lodge nearest the place
of residence of such applicants.

The right of a subordinate lodge in one state to initiate,
pass, and raise a non-resident of that state, has been frequently
questioned, and the difficulties resulting from its exercise
have been such as to lead to a very general, if not almost
universal, conclusion that the practice is inexpedient, and
ought, as a general rule, to be abandoned. Your committee
cannot conceive that any body of masons can have a right to
do an act, the natural tendency of which is to produce
jealousy, disputes and discords among the craft ; and that
such is the natural tendency of the exercise of this pretended
right, all experience has proven. — Douglass, C. F. C, Fla.,
1855.

No Grand Lodge in the Union has maintained a more rigid
position, in reference to the right or practice of the subordi-
nate lodges of our jurisdiction conferring the degrees upon
persons residing in another jurisdiction. — Clopton, G. M.
Ala., 1853.

Most of the southern and western states, and some of the
eastern, have adopted rules prohibiting their lodges from ini-
tiating citizens from other states, unless they bring with them
a recommendation from the lodge or Grand Lodge from
whose jurisdiction they come. That the Grand Lodge can
take such action in the premises as it sees fit, even entirely
to prohibit the initiation of sojourners, without intrenching
upon the established landmarks, your committee entertain
little doubt— Hatch, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1852.

The Grand Lodges of Mississippi, Indiana, Maryland,
Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee and Louisiana, permit lodges
in adjoining states to initiate persons from their jurisdiction,
provided such lodges are nearest the residence of the ap-
plicant

No lodge in this state shall initiate, pass, or raise, or admit
to membership, any person who is a citizen or permanent res-
ident of any other state or country, unless by the consent of

184 CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OVER.

the Grand Master or Grand Lodge of said state or country, or
until he shall have established a permanent residence in this
state. — Res. La., 1856.

Lodges are forbidden to initiate, pass, or raise any persoa
residing within another Grand Lodge jurisdiction, except on
recommendation for that purpose, unanimously adopted, at a
stated meeting, by the lodge nearest the residence of the
petitioner. — Reg. Miss.

It is unmasonic for any lodge to admit a citizen of another
state, without ascertaining from the Grand Secretary of such
state whether he has there applied for initiation. — Res. Ala.,
1845.

No lodge in this jurisdiction shall admit a candidate from
another jurisdiction, either within this or any other state,
and whether he be rejected or not, without.first obtaining the
consent of such nearer lodge, or the Grand Lodge of such
state.— Res. N. C, 1845.

The practice of initiating candidates from another state, is
opposed to true masonic principle and practice, and injurious
to the fraternity.— Res. Mo., 1843.

An entered apprentice or fellow craft, coming from a for-
eign lodge, and taking up his residence in the jurisdiction of
another lodge, is subject to the latter, which may advance
him if it please. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

No Grand Lodge ought to permit visitors from another
state to be initiated within her jurisdiction, unless by consent
of the Grand Lodge of the state in which they reside. — Ark.,
1855.

In the Grand Lodge of Indiana, 1855, a communication was
received from a lodge in the state of Illinois, asking permis-
sion to initiate a resident of the former state, which was
granted. — Vide Pro. Ind., 1855.

No lodge should confer the degrees upon any person who
resides in the jurisdiction of another lodge, either in or out
of the state, without the consent of such other lodge. Such
is the rule of this Grand Lodge. — Downey, G. M. Ind., 1856*

CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OVER. 185

T think the Grand Master possesses no power to grant per-
mission for a lodge out of the state to initiate a resident of
his state ; and if he has, I doubt the expediency of its exer-
cise. By obtaining the consent of the lodge in whose juris-
diction the applicant resides, any other lodge, whether in or
out of the state, may confer the degrees on the applicant, or
receive him to membership. — Downey, G. M. Lid., 1856.
Your committee agree in the views of the Grand Master on
the subject. — Spec. Com. do. [Concurred in by Grand Lodge.]

No subordinate lodge should confer any of the degrees on
citizens of another jurisdiction, without consent of such juris-
diction first obtained. — Reg. TIL

Lodges located on the line of states are directed not to ini-
tiate any resident of another state, without first obtaining
consent of the Grand Master of such state, and of the lodge
in whose jurisdiction the candidate resides. — Res. Mich., 1858.

It is in accordance with the ancient landmarks of Masonry
for any lodge to confer the degrees upon any candidate resid-
ing permanently in its vicinity, and nearer to it than to any
other lodge. — Res. Iowa, 1847.

No lodge within this jurisdiction shall initiate a person not
an inhabitant of this state. — Res. Conn., 1803.

Any lodge knowingly conferring the degrees on a person
not residing in its jurisdiction, without consent of the lodge
in whose jurisdiction he resides, shall forfeit its charter. —
Reg. Ark.

It is not legal for a lodge to receive petitions from appli-
cants in adjoining states. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 15.

Sojourners and Non-Residents. — The almost universal
usage and rule is, that a lodge cannot initiate (or advance) a
Bojourner or non-resident, without permission of the lodge
located nearest his place of residence, or in whose jurisdiction
he resides. Though the abstract right may perhaps be con-
ceded, there can be no doubt that, in this country at least, its
exercise is manifestly improper, and productive of evil.
Americin Grand Lodges, and masonic jurists, are almost

186 CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OVER.

unanimously adverse to the practice, and in most jurisdictions
such initiations are expressly forbidden by Grand Lodge reg-
ulation.

No candidate shall be received who is a resident of any
other state where a regular Grand Lodge is established, with-
out the written permission of the Grand Master of such state.
—Const. Me.

When a gentleman applies for initiation in any lodge, who
resides in another town where a regular lodge is held, or
nearer any regular lodge than that in which he is proposed, it
shall be the duty of the lodge to which he makes application
to write to such other lodge, to know if they have ever
refused him admission, or if they know any just reason why
he ought not to be made a mason ; and to the report of such
lodge due weight and consideration are to be given, — Consts.
N. H., N. /., Ala.

No lodge shall initiate a candidate whose residence is
within the jurisdiction of another lodge, without the consent
of such lodge by vote. — Const. Vt.

Nor shall any candidate be received from any other state
(he being a resident thereof) where a regular lodge is estab-
lished, without the written permission of the Grand Master of
such state. — Const. Mass.

Every lodge is prohibited from initiating, passing, or rais-
ing any one not a citizen of this district, until after due
inquiry shall be made, and answer received, from the lodge
nearest his place of residence. — Const. D. C.

No lodge in this state shall initiate, pass, or raise, or admit
to membership, any person who is a citizen or permanent
resident of any other state or country having a Grand Lodge,
unless the consent of the Grand Master or Grand Lodge of
the said state or country be first obtained. — Const. La.

No lodge shall confer any degree of Masonry upon any per-
son who resides within the jurisdiction of another lodge,
without the knowledge and unanimous consent of such lodge.
— Const. Texas.

CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OVER. 181

The practice of conferring the degrees upon mere sojourn-
ers is manifestly wrong. — G. M. of Me., 1848.

We consider it improper for a lodge to confer any degree
in Masonry upon a transient person, without due inquiry of
his standing in the community where he last resided. — Has-
well, C. F. C. Vt., 1851.

I had occasion last May to be dissatisfied with a secular
lodge for conferring the degrees of Masonry upon a non-res-
ident, whose place of abode and business was in the city of
New York. I considered the act a breach of masonic rule. —
Tucker, G. M. Vt, 1853.

There is no power which can prevent a lodge from mailing
a mason of a non-resident, except the Grand Lodge to which
it owes fealty.— King, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1857.

"We oppose the initiation of sojourners ; 1st, because it is
against usage ; 2d, every person wishing to become a mason
should be initiated in the lodge nearest his residence, where
he is best known; 3d, foreign lodges, in admitting strangers,
are liable to be imposed upon by the unworthy. It is a
practice wrong in principle, and dangerous in its results. —
— C. W. Moore, 1849.

No Grand Lodge ought to permit visitors from another
state to be initiated within her jurisdiction, unless by consent
of the Grand Lodge of the state in which they reside. — Ark.y
1852. Jfy.,1853. Miss., 1854.

We cannot, after the most diligent search, find any consti-
tutional regulation of the craft which refers to the initiation
of non-residents. A Grand Lodge may forbid the initiation
of such within its own jurisdiction, but it cannot travel
beyond its own territory, and prescribe the same rule to
another Grand Lodge. Where such making is permitted, it
is legal, and the candidate so made becomes a regular mason,
and is entitled to the right of visitation. — Mackey, P. M. L,,
237.

Previous Residence. — The period which must elapse after
a candidate removes into the jurisdiction of a lodge, before

]88 CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OVER.

such lodge can proceed to initiate him, without consent of
any other lodge, is regulated by each Grand Lodge. The
general usage requires a residence of one year, and, in the
absence of special Grand Lodge regulations, that period should
be required.

No lodge shall initiate a candidate who has not resided six
months within the jurisdiction of said lodge. — Const. Mich.

No person shall be made a mason, unless he has resided one
year in the district of the lodge to which he seeks admission,
or produces a certificate from a lodge in the place of his pre-
vious residence. — Const. Cat

No petition shall be received from any candidate for ini-
tiation until he shall have resided one year within the juris-
diction of this Grand Lodge. — Res. Oregon, 1857.

Resolved, That in the opinion of this Grand Lodge, the con-
stitutional provisions will be best sustained by lodges requir-
ing a candidate for initiation to be an actual resident in the
immediate vicinity of the lodge to which he applies, for at
least four months before his application, the same applying
only to citizens of this state. — New York, 1852.

No lodge under the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, shall
initiate, pass, or raise any candidate from another jurisdiction,
until he has been a resident within this state for twelve
months, without the recommendation of the lodge or Grand
Lodge within whose jurisdiction he last previously resided.
Provided, that this rule shall not be construed to apply to appli-
cations from sea-faring or military men. — Res. New York, 1853.

A previous residence of twelve consecutive months is
required in South Carolina, except in case of mariners, and
they must have sailed out of some port in the state for the
same length of time. — Res. 1852.

Arkansas requires a previous residence of twelve months
within the state, or a recommendation from the Subordinate
or Grand Lodge within whose jurisdiction the applicant pre-
viously resided, before an application for the degrees can be
received, sea-faring and military men excepted. — 1854.

CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OVER. 189

A residence of at least one year within the jurisdiction of
the subordinate lodge, is an essential qualification to the con-
sideration of a petition for initiation, unless it be accompanied
by the recommendation of the lodge nearest his last place of
residence. — Res. Ky., 1855. Res. Ga., 1852.

Lodges under this jurisdiction are instructed not to initiate,
pass, or raise any candidate, who has not resided in the state
twelve months next before such application, unless he be a cit-
izen of a neighboring state, residing in the vicinity of a lodge
upon our border, or has been such citizen within the said
twelve months. — Reg. Miss.

Lodges shall not admit candidates from another jurisdic-
tion until they have been residents in this state for twelve
months, without a recommendation of the lodge in whose
jurisdiction they previously resided. — Res. Md., 1845.

No lodge shall receive a petition for initiation, unless fully
satisfied that the petitioner has been resident within the
state twelve months, and within the jurisdiction of the lodge
three months. — Res. Cal., 1851.

No particular period of residence within the jurisdiction
of any subordinate lodge is necessary, prior to initiation.
The candidate must have resided in the state twelve months.
— Hillyer, G. M. of Miss., 1855.

Previous residence in the state twelve calendar months. —
Reg. HI.

No lodge in this jurisdiction shall initiate any person who
has not resided at least twelve months in the vicinity of the
lodge in which he is proposed for initiation, and his character
thoroughly known. — Res. Conn., 1803.

Time (previous residence) should not be a test of qualifica-
tion for initiation. — Iowa, 1852.

No lodge should be allowed to receive an application for
initiation, unless the applicant has resided in our state one
year, and in the jurisdiction of the lodge at least half that
time ; except in a case of an officer or soldier in the United
States army.— Pierson, G. M. of Min., 1858.

190 CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OVER.

All applicants for the degrees in Masonry shall reside
within the jurisdiction of the lodge to which application is
made, at least one year previous to making such application.
— Res. Minn., 1858.

Must have resided in the jurisdiction of the lodge twelve
months, or produce certificate of good character from the
lodge nearest their former place of residence. — Res. Tenn.,
1858.

The degrees shall not be conferred on any one unless he
has resided in this state twelve months immediately preced-
ing his application. — Res. Texas.

Finishing Work. — It is a well-settled principle of masonic
law that every lodge has the right of completing all work it
may have lawfully commenced. The written rule is as old as
the ancient charge, which declares that all masons shall hon-
estly " finish their work," and that a brother " shall not be
supplanted in his work, if he be able to finish it." A lodge,
therefore, cannot confer a degree upon a candidate who has
previously regularly received a degree in another lodge,
without the consent of such other lodge.

It is the sense of this Grand Lodge, that it is contrary to
the established rules of Freemasonry for one lodge to craft
or raise an entered apprentice initiated in any other lodge,
without the recommendation and consent of the lodge in
which he was initiated. — Res. Me., 1852.

No lodge shall confer any degree on a brother who has
been initiated in another lodge, without first obtaining, if
practicable, the permission of said lodge, and a certificate
that he has complied with all its requisitions. — Const. Md.

It is improper and unmasonic for any lodge to pass or raise
any person initiated in another lodge, except on recommend-
ation of such other lodge, and certificate of good standing

Reg. Miss.

There is no ancient regulation prohibiting a candidate ini-
tiated in one lodge from receiving the second and third
degrees in another lodge. — C. W. Moore, 1849.

CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OYER. 191

Every lodge has a right to finish its work, rightfully com-
menced.— Hillter, G. M. Miss., 1855.

The Master and masons shall honestly finish their work. —
Old Cliarges. None shall supplant a brother, or put him out
of his work, if he be capable to finish the same. — lb.

A lodge cannot with propriety undertake any unfinished
work of another, without its consent. — Hubbard, Ohio% 1852.

Where a person was initiated in a lodge, and afterward a
lodge was established nearer his residence, held, that he
might lawfully receive the remaining degrees in either lodge.
—16.

Improper and unmasonic to craft or raise any person ini-
tiated in another lodge, without the recommendation of such
other lodge. — Reg. Ark.

No lodge can pass or raise a candidate who was initiated
in another lodge. — Mackey, P. M. L., 113.

No lodge can confer degrees for another. — Morris, Am.
F. M., iii., 129.

The degrees of fellow craft or master mason shall not be
conferred on any person who has been initiated in any other
lodge, unless he produce a certificate of good character from
the lodge that initiated him Mo., 1822. Vt, 1818.

No lodge shall confer any degrees of Masonry upon any
brother who has received a degree in any other lodge, or
upon any person who resides within the jurisdiction of
another lodge, without the knowledge and unanimous consent
of such lodge. — Const. Texas.

It is the sense of this Grand Lodge that it is contrary to the
established rules of Freemasonry for one lodge to craft or
raise an E. A. initiated in another lodge, without the consent
and recommendation of the lodge in which he was initiated.
—Res. Me., 1852.

No entered apprentice or fellow craft, initiated or passed
in any lodge without the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge,
And within the United States, shall be passed or raised in any

192 CANDIDATES — JURISDICTION OVER.

lodge under this jurisdiction, without the recommendation of
the lodge in which he was first admitted, or a dispensation
from the Grand Master, unless said entered apprentice or fel-
low craft shall have removed from the state where he was
first admitted, and taken up his residence within the jurisdic-
tion of this Grand Lodge. — Const. Me.

When application for the degree of fellow craft or master
mason is made to any lodge other than that in which the
applicant was initiated or passed, the Secretary of the lodge
applied to shall, unless such application be accompanied by
the recommendation of the Master and Wardens of the lodge
in which he was initiated or passed, inquire, by letter or
otherwise, of such lodge, whether such applicant has been
refused advancement therein; or if any reason be known
why he ought not to be advanced ; and in all cases where it
shall appear that there are good and sufficient reasons against
his advancement, his case shall be suspended until the objec-
tions be removed. — Const. N. H.

No apprentice or craftsman, initiated or passed in any
lodge in the United States, shall be passed or raised in this
jurisdiction, other than in the lodge where he was so ini-
tiated or passed, without the written recommendation of such
lodge. — Const. Vt.

No entered apprentice or fellow craft, initiated or passed
in any lodge within the United States, shall be passed or
raised in any lodge under this jurisdiction, without the con-
sent of the Master and Wardens of the lodge in which he
was first admitted, or a dispensation from the Grand Master.
— Consts. Mass. and Wis.

No entered apprentice or fellow craft, initiated or passed
in any lodge within the United States, shall be passed or
raised in any lodge under the jurisdiction of this Grand
Lodge, other than that in which he was initiated ; unless
he shall produce a recommendation from the lodge in which
he was initiated or passed, provided said lodge continue in
existence. — Consts. New York and Min.

The same in New Jersey, except the last clause.

CANDIDATES — PREVIOUS NOTICE OF. 193

No degree shall be conferred on a brother who has been
initiated in another lodge, unless by permission of said lodge.
—Const. D. C.

The rule in Alabama is the same as in New York, &c,
except that the applicant must produce a dismission from the
lodge initiating him, with a certificate of good standing, and
that he has paid all dues ; provided such lodge be in existence.

No lodge shall receive the petition of a brother who has
previously received a part of the degrees in another lodge,
without first having obtained the consent of such lodge, if the
same be still in existence, and in all other respects shall pro-
ceed as with other applications. — Const. La.

In Iowa, a recommendation, or certificate of good standing,
is required before a brother can be advanced in any other
than the lodge which initiated him, provided such lodge be in
existence.

No entered apprentice or fellow craft shall be advanced to
a superior degree in any lodge other than that in which he re-
ceived the previous degree, unless by the consent, in writing,
of that lodge, if still in existence. — Consts. Cal. and Oregon.

Previous Notice.
No man can be made a mason without one month's previous
notice, except by a dispensation from the Grand Master, or
the one authorized by the constitution to grant such dispen-
sations. In a few jurisdictions, lodges are allowed to dispense
with such previous notice, "in cases of emergency;" but
such a departure from the ancient rule is, at least, to be
regretted.

No man can be made or admitted a member of a particular
lodge, without previous notice one month before given to the
said lodge, in order to make due inquiry into the reputation
and capacity of the candidate, unless by the dispensation
aforesaid. — Old Regulations, 1721. Const. N. J., (in substance.)

No petition for initiation shall be received by any lodge,
except at a regular communication, and shall not be acted
9

194 CANDIDATES — PREVIOUS NOTICE OP.

upon until tlie next regular communication, unless by consent
of one of the first four officers of the Grand Lodge. — Const Vt.

No candidate shall be balloted for who has not been pro-
posed four weeks, without first obtaining a dispensation
therefor. — Const. Me.

No candidate for initiation shall be balloted for until his
application has laid over for the consideration of the mem-
bers at least four weeks, unless by a dispensation for that
purpose. — Const. N. H.

No candidate shall be balloted for who has not been pro-
posed at a stated monthly meeting, and who shall not have
stood so proposed from one regular monthly meeting to an-
other, without a dispensation therefor. — Const. Mass.

No one shall be made a mason at the same meeting of the
lodge in which he shall be proposed. And from this rule no
dispensation shall be allowed. — Const. R. 1.

A candidate must be proposed in open lodge, at a stated
meeting, and can only be accepted at a stated meeting follow-
ing.— Const. N. Y.

A candidate for initiation or membership must apply for
admission by petition, at a stated meeting, at least one month
jrior to his reception. — Const. Venn.

Every petition shall be submitted to a committee of inquiry,
and lie over at least one month, unless in cases of pressing
emergency, which shall not be considered to exist unless the
candidate is about to journey abroad. — Const. N. C.

No one shall be initiated, passed, or raised in any subordi-
nate lodge, without being proposed by petition, at a regular
meeting, which petition shall lie over until the next regular
meeting. — Cons. Ga.

All petitions for initiation must lie over one month. — Const.
Flo. Res. Tenn., 1857.

All petitions must lie over one month, unless by dispensa-
tion in a case of actual emergency. — Const. D. C.

No person shall be admitted a member, or initiated, at the
Bame communication at which he is proposed. — Const. Ala.

CANDIDATES — PREVIOUS NOTICE OF. 195

The lodge may proceed to ballot, if four weeks have
elapsed since the petition was received, and on no consider-
ation before that time. — Const. La.

In Ohio and Indiana, all applications for initiation or mem
bership must lie over at least from one stated communication
to another, unless three-fourths present regard it a case of
emergency ; in which case, by unanimous vote, a ballot may
be ordered.

No candidate shall be balloted for in less than ten days
after his petition shall have been referred. — Const. Mich.

No candidate shall be balloted for who has not stood pro-
posed from one stated monthly meeting to another, or at least
twenty da}Ts, without a dispensation therefor. — Const. Wis.

A candidate must be proposed at a stated meeting, and can
only be accepted at a stated meeting following. — Const. Min.

Nor shall a ballot be taken on such petition until the next
stated meeting after its presentation. — Const. Iowa.

No petition for initiation or membership shall be acted on
until it has been referred to a committee of inquiry, and laid
over one month, unless by dispensation of Grand Master. —
Const. Ky.

Which petition shall lie over until the next regular meet-
ing.— Const. Texas.

But shall not be acted upon until after the expiration of four
weeks. — Consts. Cal. and Oregon.

No person shall be made a mason until he has been prop-
erly proposed at one regular meeting of the lodge, and his
name (&c.) shall have been sent to all the members in the
summons for the next regular meeting. — Const. Ca.

No initiation shall take place in a town where there is more
than one subordinate lodge, without previous notice thereof
being given in all other lodges therein. — Ky., 1851.

No petition for initiation or membership shall be acted on,
in any lodge, at the same meeting at which it is received,
unless in case of emergency, and when the character of the
candidate is well known to the members thereof. — Const. McL

196 CANDIDATES — PREVIOUS NOTICE OP.

Any candidate proposed shall stand one month upon the
lodge books. * * * But a stranger may be made as soon
as is convenient, by unanimous vote of the lodge. — By-laws
1739.

Petitions for initiation, for membership, and for advance-
ment, (from other jurisdictions,) must lie over one stated
meeting. — Reg. Miss.

No person shall be made a mason without a regular propo-
sition at one lodge, and a ballot at the next regular lodge.* —
Const. Eng.

No ballot shall be taken on any such petition before the
next stated meeting, except by dispensation. — Const. Kansas.

Applications for initiation must lie over at least one month.
Lei., 1858.

Lodges are instructed not to act upon any petition for ini-
tiation or membership, unless the same has laid over one
lunar month. — Reg. III.

Every candidate proposed shall stand on the minutes until
the next lodge night after he is proposed. — By-laws 1739.

Every person proposed for initiation shall stand proposed
one month. — Mas. Convention, Conn., 1783.

Petitions must lie over from one stated meeting to another.
— Iowa, 1851.

No lodge can initiate a candidate without previous notice.
— Mackey.

Dispensing with Previous Notice. — The Grand Master, or
the one acting in his absence, has the prerogative of granting
dispensations for conferring the degrees upon a candidate
in less than the constitutional time, whenever he may con-
sider it to be for the good of Masonry.

This important privilege cannot be exercised by any other
officer, except it be expressly delegated to him by the Consti-
tution of his Grand Lodge.

* The Constitutions of England, Ireland and Canada, provide, that in certain
cases seven days' notice may suffice, but never less; not even by dispensation.

CANDIDATES- -PREVIOUS NOTICE OF. 197

The Constitutions of the following Grand Lodges allow such
dispensations to be granted by the Grand Master, Deputy
Grand Master, District Deputy Grand Masters, and Grand
Wardens, viz : Maine and New Hampshire.

The Constitution of Vermont allows such dispensations to
be granted by the Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master, and
Grand Wardens.

In Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, only the Grand Mas-
ter and the District Deputy Grand Masters, are allowed to
grant dispensations for conferring degrees.

In the following named Grand Lodge jurisdictions, only the
Grand Master, or the one officiating in his absence, can grant
dispensations to confer degrees: Rhode Island, Connecticut,
New York, Minnesota, New Jersey, District of Columbia,
Virginia, South Carolina, Louisiana, Indiana, Illinois, Mich-
igan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas and
California. In Texas and Missouri, the privilege is allowed
to the Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master, and District Dep-
uty Grand Masters.

In the following Grand Constitutions the privilege is con-
fined to the Grand Master and Deputy Grand Master : North
Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Ohio, Oregon and
Kansas.

In Canada, no one can receive the degrees without seven
days' previous notice, and even the Grand Master is forbid
granting a dispensation to set aside or dispense with such
notice. \

The power of granting dispensations belongs alone to the
Grand Master. His Deputy and the District Deputies act for
him, in his absence. The Constitution provides for the
appointment of deputies purely as a matter of convenience.
They are authorized to grant dispensations solely on the
ground of being his deputies. No other person, therefore,
has an inherent or constitutional power to dispense with the
full requirements of the laws and regulations of the Grand
Lodge. — Randall, G. M. Mass., 1853.

A resolution of the Grand Lodge of Tennessee (1853) pro-

198 CANDIDATES — PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS.

hibits the granting of a dispensation to confer the three
degrees on the same person at one communication. We
believe a Grand Lodge cannot, legally, pass such an enact-
ment to apply to the Grand Master. We believe the author-
ity of a Grand Master to exercise this power is irrevocable,
and not subject to Grand Lodge regulation. — King, C. F. C.
ofN. Y., 1854.

We hold that the dispensing power is the inherent preroga-
tive of the Grand Master, and can be lawfully exercised only by
him, or, in his absence, by his Deputy, or whoever may consti-
tutionally represent him as Grand Master. The Grand Master
is "absent" — 1st, whenever his Deputy may preside in Grand
Lodge, that is, when his principal is not present ; 2d, when
not within the proper limits of his jurisdiction ; 3d, when, by
sickness or other cause, he is rendered incapable of discharg-
ing his official duties. — C. W. Moore.

Ancient prerogative of the Grand Master, and should only
be exercised by his permission. — Heard, G. M. Mass., 1857.

Prerequisite Qualifications.
Lawful Age. — According to almost universal usage, a can-
didate cannot be made a mason before he arrives at the age
of twenty-one years.

A brother (E. E.) writes to know if a person who is every
way well qualified for a mason, except that he lacks six
months of being twenty-one years of age, cannot be made a
mason.

We reply, that the Ancient Regulations of 1720, say, reg-
ulation 4 : " No lodge shall make more than five new brethren
at one time, nor any man under- the age of twenty-five, who must
>be also his own master, unless by a dispensation from the Grand
Master or his Deputy."

In the absence of any other regulation, this would be the
rule ; but there are other regulations upon this point. Some
Grand Lodges specify twenty-one years at least, but others are
silent upon the point. The Grand Lodge of Maine does not
specify any particular age, but its work says " lawful age*

CANDIDATES — PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS. 199

Wliat, then, is lawful age ? There can be but one answer to
the question, and that is, twenty-one years. The "Ancient
Charges" say, "mature and discreet age ;" the "Ancient Reg-
ulations" say "nor any man under the age of twenty-five
years ;" the Grand Lodge of Maine says, "of lawful age," and
other Grand Lodges say the same; but some specify particu-
larly not less than twenty-one years of age. Dr. Mackey, in
his " Lexicon of Masonry," says : " The physical qualifications
are, that the candidate shall be twenty-one years old, or more,"
&c. Again, in his "Principles of Masonic Law," he says,
that " the candidate must be ' of mature and discreet age.' "
But what is the precise period when one is supposed to have
arrived at this maturity and discretion, cannot be inferred
from any uniform practice of the craft in different countries.
The provisions of the civil law, which make twenty-one the
age of maturity, have, however, been generally followed. In
this country the regulation is general, that the candidate
must be twenty-one years of age. Such, too, was the regula*
tion adopted by the General Assembly, which met on the
27th Dec, 1663, and which prescribed that "no person shall
be accepted unless he be twenty-one years old, or more." In
Prussia, the candidate is required to be twenty-five ; in Eng-
land, twenty-one, "unless by dispensation from the Grand
Master or Provincial Grand Master ;" in Ireland, twenty-one,
except " by dispensation from the Grand Master or the Grand
Lodge ;" in France, twenty-one, unless the candidate be the
son of a mason who has rendered important service to the
craft, with the consent of his parent or guardian, or a young
man who has served six months with his corps in the army ;
such persons may be initiated at eighteen : in Switzerland,
the age of qualification is fixed at twenty-one, and in Frank-
fort-on-the-Main, at twenty. In this country, as I have already
observed, the regulation of 1663 is rigidly enforced, and no
candidate, who has not arrived at the age of twenty-one, can
be initiated. — Chase, Mas. Jour., 1856.

-An act of the legislature, empowering a minor to act for
himself hi the transaction of Decuniary matters, can have no

200 CANDIDATES — PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS.

effect to make him of lawful age, as called for by masonic
rules. — Hillyer, G. M. Miss., 1855.

An application for initiation from a person undei twenty-
one years of age cannot be received by the lodge. — Swigeet,
G. M. Ky., 1858.

No man shall be made a mason in any lodge, under the age
of twenty-one years, unless by a dispensation from the Grand
Master or Provincial Grand Master. — Const. England.

Every candidate shall be at least eighteen years of age
before being entered an apprentice. — Const. Scot.

A lodge shall not initiate any person as a mason until he
shall have attained the age of twenty-one years, unless by
dispensation from the Grand Master, the Deputy Grand Mas-
ter, or the Grand Lodge. — Const. Ire.

Physical Qualifications. — The ancient rule required of all
candidates for Masonry that they be physically " capable of
learning the art." Though the rule has been greatly relaxed,
and loosely interpreted in these " latter days," we are confi-
dent such interpretation has not been for the best interests of
the institution.

No Master should take an apprentice unless he has suffi-
cient employment for him, and unless he be a perfect youth,
having no maim or defect in his body that may render him
uncapable of learning the art of serving his Master's LORD,
and of being made a brother, and then a fellow craft, in due
time. — Ancient Charges, 1720.

The men made masons must be free-born, or no bondmen ;
of mature age, and of good report ; hail and sound ; not
deformed or dismembered, at the time of making. * * *
No Master should take an apprentice that is not the son of
honest parents, a perfect youth, without maim or defect in his
body, and capable of learning the mysteries of the art; that
so the lords, or founders, may be well served, and the craft
not despised; and that when of age, and expert, he may
become an entered apprentice, or a freemason of the lowest
degree ; and, upon his improvements, a fellow craft and a

CANDIDATES — PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS. 201

master mason, capable to undertake the Lord's work. — Der-
mott, 1756.

By the ancient regulations, the physical deformity of an
individual operates as a bar to his admission into the frater-
nity. But in view of the fact that this regulation was
adopted for the governmen ; of the craft, at a period when
they united the character of operative with that of speculative
masons, this Grand Lodge, in common, it is believed, with
most of her sister Grand Lodges in this country and in
Europe, has authorized such a construction of the regulation
as that, where the deformity does not amount to an inability
to meet the requirements of the ritual, and honestly to acquire
the means of subsistence, it constitutes no hindrance to ini-
tiation.— Const. Mass.

By the ancient regulations, the physical deformity of an
individual operates as a bar to his admission into the frater-
nity. But as this regulationNvas adopted for the government
of the craft, at a period when they united the character of
operative with that of speculative masons, this Grand Lodge
authorizes such a construction of the regulation as that, when
the deformity of the candidate is not such as to prevent him
from being instructed in the arts or mysteries of Freemasonry,
and does not amount to an inability honestly to acquire the
means of subsistence, the admission will not be an infringe-
ment upon the ancient landmarks, but will be perfectly con-
sistent with the spirit of our institution. — Const. Maine.

The applicant must be hale and sound, so as to be capable
of gaining a livelihood for himself and family, and to perform
the work of a member in the lodge. — Const. Penn.

No individual, physically so deformed as to disable him
from honestly acquiring the means of subsistence, or who may
be incapacitated to become a useful member, shall be ini-
tiated in any lodge. — Const. N. C.

Xo candidate shall be initiated, by any lodge, but such as
are upright in body, not deformed or dismembered, but of
hale and entire limbs. — Const. D. C.
9*

202 CANDIDATES PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS.

He must also be free from such corporeal deformity as
would render him incapable of practicing and teaching the
ritual of the fraternity. — Const. Ala.

When the physical disabilities of a candidate are not such
as to prevent him from being initiated into the several
degrees and mysteries of Freemasonry, his admission shall
not be construed an infringement upon the ancient landmarks ;
but, on the contrary, will be perfectly consistent with the
spirit of the institution. —Consts. Ohio and Nebraska. Const.
Indiana, (except last clause.)

Every candidate applying for the deg v.es in Masonry, must
possess sufficient natural endowments, and the senses of a
man, upright in body, not dismembered or deformed at the
time of making, but of hale and entire limbs, as a man ought
to be. — Const. Wis.

Men made masons, must be of mature age, free-born, of
good report, hale and sound, not deformed or dismembered,
and no eunuch. — Const. Min.

When the deformity of a candidate for initiation is not such
as to prevent him from being instructed in the arts and mys-
teries of Freemasonry, his admission will not be an infringe-
ment upon the landmarks, but will be perfectly consistent
with the spirit of our institution. — Const. Ky. Reg. Miss.

No lodge under this jurisdiction shall hereafter initiate,
pass, or raise any candidate whose physical defects are such
as to prevent him from conforming literally to all the require-
ments of the several degrees of ancient craft Masonry. — Res.
Md., 1854.

The candidate must have no such deformity as shall inter-
fere with his giving and receiving all masonic signs and sal-
utations in due form. [Explanation of provision in the Grand
Constitution of Maine, by a Committee, 1853.]

It is competent and masonically lawful for Koyal Arch
Chapters, as well as Blue Lodges, to confer the respective
degrees of Masonry, properly conferable by each, upon all
candidates whose defects of bodily qualifications are not such

CANDIDATES — PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS. 203

as to prevent them from conforming literally to what the 3ev
eral degrees respectively require of them. — Spec. Com. Gen
Gr. Chap., 1850.*

We adopt the decision of the Grand Lodge of Kentucky. —
Haswell, C. F. C. of Vt., 1851.

If a candidate proposed for admission is in any manner
maimed, lame or defective, he shall not be initiated without a
dispensation from the Grand Master, his Deputy, or the Grand
Lodge, to be applied for by memorial, wherein the defect
shall be clearly specified, under a penalty of three pounds, to
be paid by the offending lodge. — Const. Ireland.

Resolved, That it is a violation of a landmark to make a
mason of one who has the disability of lameness, occasioned
by a shortened or crooked limb. — JV". Y. 1856.

Resolved, That the loss of a foot, a hand, or the thumb and
fingers of the right hand, or the total absence or deprivation
of either of the senses of hearing, seeing or feeling, constitutes
physical disability and disqualification, and no person labor-
ing under either of the above specified disabilities is eligible
to be made a mason. — Miss., 1856.

In 1851, Brother Rockwell, D. G. M. of Georgia, refused a
dispensation to confer the degrees upon a candidate who had
lost an eye. He says : The requisition that he should be hale
and sound, is decisive of the question. These two words
import that he should be " entire and unmutilated."

In commenting upon the above, the N. Y. C. F C, (Hatch,)
1852, say: "This decision is sound, and agrees with the old
usages."

A person who is lame from a dislocation of the hip, is
excluded by the Book of Constitutions of South Carolina. —
S. C, 1855.

The loss of a leg, an arm, a foot, a hand, both eyes, or the
use of any member necessary to his instruction, would be suf-
ficient to exclude. The want of one eye, a toe, certain fingers,

* The General Grand Chapter adopted the report, and also a reeolutiou
embodying the cono'Msions of the committee, as above given.

204 CANDIDATES— PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS.

or any other member not necessary for the purpose of laboi
and instruction in Masonry, would not be a fatal defect. — Res.
Ga., 1852.

Louisiana, in 1855, refused a charter to a lodge U. D., for
initiating a man who had lost his legs, and other irregularities.

A candidate who cannot hear well, but can distinctly hear
a whisper of one with whom he converses much, is eligible. —
C. W. Moore, 1848.

The question of conferring degrees upon maimed candi-
dates should be left to the decision of each chapter. — Res. Gr.
CJiap. Ind., 1852

The degrees should not be conferred upon any one whose
physical deformity is such that he cannot acquire a knowl-
edge and impart to others the secrets of the craft, according
to the rules of the order. — Res. Cat, 1851.

The admission of maimed and deformed individuals into the
order, is a violation of the ancient landmarks and usages, and
of the ancient constitutions of Masonry. — Res. Ga., 1848.

A man who has lost his right arm cannot be made a mason.
Hubbard, Ohio, 1852.

Having no maim or defect in his body that may render him
incapable of learning the art, and being instructed in the
degrees. — Reg. 111.

Cannot initiate a candidate who has lost his right hand. —
Iowa, 1858.

Must be able to receive possession of- the ancient land-
marks, and to exemplify the same, so as to be recognized as a
member of the craft. — Res. Texas, 1849.

Must be a man ; at least twenty-one years of age ; not in
his dotage ; and perfect in all his parts ; neither deformed nor
dismembered. — Mackey, P. M. L.

No person shall hereafter be accepted a Freemason but
such as are of able body. — Reg. 1663. (Ol. Preston, 162.)

That he that be made be able in all degrees ; that is, free-
Dorn, of a good kindred, true, and no bondsman ; and that he

CANDIDATES — PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS. 205

have his right limbs as a man ought to have. — Old Charge,
1683. (Ol. Preston, 72.)

Not deformed or dismembered at the time of their making.
—Ahiman Rezon, Penn., 1783; N. C, 1805; Tenn., 1805;
& C, 1807; Md., 1826.

Sound in mind and all their members. — Mo., 1823.

We depart from the ancient usages and landmarks of
Masonry whenever we admit an individual wanting in one of
the human senses, or who is in any particular maimed or de-
formed.—C. F. C. of Ga., 1848.

The rationale of the law excluding persons physically imper-
fect and deformed, lies deeper, and is more ancient than the
source ascribed to it;* and will be found identical with that
which obtained among the ancient Jews. * * * No one
can in perfection be made a brother, if he is not a man, with
body free from maim, defect and deformity. — G-. F. Yates,
N. Y, 1848.

Not only ancient usage, but the fundamental constitution
of the order — the Ancient Charges — forbid the initiation of
maimed persons.— C. F. C. of N. Y., 1848

I have refused to assent to the initiation of maimed persons.
— G. M. ofN. J., 1849.

It is not legal to initiate, pass, or raise a man with but one
arm or leg. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 31.

Certain points of the body are used in masonic communica-
tions. If an applicant has not got them all, he is physically
ineligible. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 154; If an applicant can
acquire and communicate the knowledge of Masonry in a
masonic manner, he is qualified for the secrets of the institu-
tion.— lb., Code Mas. Law, 354.

The provision in our Constitution, permitting the initiation
of a maimed person, if his deformity was not such as to pre-
vent his being instructed, has, on more mature reflection, been
stricken out.— Brown, G. M. of Fla., 1849.

• The presumec operat re origin of the order. — G. W. C.

206 CANDIDATES — PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS.

A man having but one arm or one leg, or who is in any
way deprived of his due proportion of limbs and members, is
as incapable of initiation as a woman. — S. C, 1849.

Religious Qualifications. — According to what is generally
received as " ancient Masonry," a candidate must be " a good
man and true, or man of honor and honesty," and, before his
initiation, must acknowledge his trust to be in God. (An
Atheist cannot be made a mason.) In our opinion, any fur-
ther religious test is not necessary ; and to require that a can-
didate profess a belief in the "divine authenticity of the
Bible," or a " state of future rewards and punishments," is a
serious innovation in the very body of Masonry.

We now hold, as our forefathers held, and as we hope
our posterity to hold, that from the votaries of Masonry is
expected and required a sincere belief in the existence of a
God, the Creator and Governor of the world ; and that beyond
this great principle of faith, it is not lawful to impose any
religious test as a requisite for admission to our mysteries. —
C. F. C. of Va., 1848. The true rule is expressed in the above
declaration.— C. F. C. of N. H., 1849.

It is anti-masonic to require any religious test, other than
the candidate should believe in a God, the Creator and Gov-
ernor of the universe. — Res. Ala., 1848.

We can find no reason for interdicting any otherwise
worthy applicant, who " firmly believes in the existence of a
Supreme Being," nor can we allow of any right to interrogate
him further as to his religious belief. — Hubbard, C. F. C. of
N. H., 1857. This we believe to be the true doctrine. — O'Sul-
livan, C. F. C.of Mo., 1858.

The Grand Lodge of Vermont condemn as unmasonic the
introduction of any tests of a sectarian character. The only
faith required of a candidate is a belief and trust in God ; with-
out this, no obligation would be binding on him. — Haswell,
C. F. C. of Vt., 1849.

Resolved, That in the opinion of this Grand Lodge, the
exclusion of any class of men from the privileges of Masonry,

CANDIDATES — PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS. 20 1

who believe in the existence and moral government of the
Supreme Being, evinces a spirit adverse to the genius of our
institution, and that it is an assumption of power not sanc-
tioned by the ancient usages of the craft. — Mass., 1843.

The true doctrine on this subject has been well laid down
by our illustrious brother, Prince Murat, Grand Master of the
Grand Orient of France. All men who believe in the exist-
ence of a Supreme Being, the Great Architect of the universe ;
who believe in the immortality of the soul, and, consequently,
in an eternal well-being; every man who feels the love of his
fellow-man vibrate in him, is acceptable among us. — Morris,
C.F. C.ofKy., 1857.

Resolved, That this Grand Lodge is clearly of the opinion,
that a distinct avowal of a belief in the divine authority of
the Holy Scriptures should be required of every one who is
admitted to the privileges of Masonry, and that a denial of the
same is an offense against the institution, calling for exem-
plary discipline. — Ohio, 1856.

The Grand Lodge of Ohio (see the preceding paragraph)
attempted to amend, as they supposed, the law, and at once
the universality of the institution is destroyed, and none but
the Christian becomes eligible to initiation. — Mackey, S. C,
1856.

Resolved, That candidates for Masonry should be required
to avow their belief not only in the existence of God, but in
the divine authenticity of His Word, as revealed in the Bible.
— Storer, C. F. C. of Conn., 1856. [Rejected.]

The only declaration of faith necessary on the part of the
candidate, before initiation, is the profession of belief and
trust in God. But, we also say, that a man who declares his
disbelief in the divine authenticity of the Holy Bible, cannot
be made a mason.— Brown, C. F. C. Fla., 1858.

Your committee believe this (Ohio Res.) all wrong. The
Jews, the Chinese, the Turks, each reject either the New Tes-
tament or the Old, or both, and yet we see no good reason
why they should not be made mason3. In fact, Blue Lodge

208 CANDIDATES — PREEEQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS.

Masonry has nothing whatever to do with the Bible. It ie
not founded on the Bible ; if it was, it would not be Masonry ;
it would be something else. Masonry is a mere charitable
institution — nothing else — and it is founded upon tradition.
Solomon, to whom it is traced, and who is said to have been
the first M. E. Grand Master, never heard of the New Testa-
ment. He was not a Christian. We must, therefore, either
blot out the memory of Solomon, and also that of the other
Grand Masters, or we must not insist upon a belief in the au-
thenticity of either the Old or New Testament. The position
which Christian masons assign to the Bible, is a very natural,
but not a necessary one. — It is thus to them as Christians,
and not as masons. — Sayee, C. F. C. Ala., 1855.

Freemasonry calls no man to account for his belief of any
religion on the globe. — Const. Grand Orient of France.

We would require no express declaration of a belief in
either the Old or New Testament, as an open qualification of
a candidate ; but we feel bound to adopt the views of the
Chairman of the C. F. C. of Iowa — without the Bible, there is
no Masonry. — Daniel, C. F. C. Miss., 1857.

Resolved, That the Grand Lodge of Texas declares that a
belief in the divine authenticity of the Holy Scriptures, is an
indispensable prerequisite for masonic admission ; and the
Grand Lodge does not mean to exclude the Israelite, whom it
does not regard as being disqualified for the mysteries of
Freemasonry. — Texas, 1857.

No religious test shall ever be required of any applicant
for initiation, other than a steadfast belief in the existence
and perfections of Deity ; and no lodge under this jurisdiction
shall receive any candidate without the acknowledgment of
such belief. — Const Neb.

The religious views of a candidate are not to be regarded
at all. It is sufficient if he believes in the existence and pro-
vidence of God.— C. W. Moore, 1849.

No Christian doubts the authority of the Bible, and in this
country we need not trouble ourselves mucin about any other

CANDIDATES — PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS. 209

class of people. We place it upon our altars as the Word of
God — the initiate is practically taught so to regard it — and
we taVe it, and enjoin others to take it, as the rule and guide
of our conduct. This is enough. If any offer who are not
willing so to recognize and take it, we are not bound to receive
them. Every lodge is the judge of the fitness of its own candi-
dates. Let this suffice, and "remove not the ancient land-
marks which our fathers have set." — C. W. Moore. The letter
and the spirit of the above we heartily endorse. — G. W. C.

Masonry simply requires of the candidate his assent to one
great fundamental religious truth, the existence and provi-
dence of God. — Declaration of five thousand Freemasons of New
England, 1831.

Do you seriously declare, upon your honor, that you believe
in the existence of a God, and a state of future rewards and
punishments? — Reg. Tennessee, from 1823 to 1843*

It is clearly settled that, in the first degrees of Masonry,
religious tenets shall not be a barrier to the admission or ad-
vancement of applicants provided they profess a belief in God
and His Holy Word.— Res. Ohio, 1820.

No test, except the belief in a God who governs the uni-
verse, should be exacted — C. F. C. of R. L, 1850. Bo. Ohio,
1850. Res. Ala., 1848.

If the applicant believe in the moral law, (the Ten Com-
mandments,) and govern himself accordingly, we can inquire
no further. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 121.

By the usages and principles of our order, he who does not
believe in, and acknowledge the Bible, as the rule and guide
of his conduct, ought not to be received into our order. —
Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

With the spirit of the Texas resolution we cannot concur.
It is not Ancient Free and Accepted Masonry. In the latter, a
belief in Deity, in God, or rather a trust in God, is all that is
required of a candidate. — C. F. C. of R. I., 1858.

* It is bit just that we inform the reader that this regulation was nearly a
de<id letter luring the twenty years it remained among the regulations.

210 CANDIDATES — PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS.

The Grand Lodge of Iowa recognizes no religions creed 01
dogma,, as a prerequisite to gain admission into the portals
of her temple ; all she requires is, that the candidate should
believe in the existence of God, the Creator of all things, and
be free-born, of lawful age, and well recommended as a good
man and true. — Paryin, C. F. C. Iowa, 1849.

Resolved, That Masonry, as we have received it from our
fathers, teaches the divine authenticity of the Holy Scrip-
tures, and that the views of candidates on this subject should
be ascertained by the committee of inquiry, or otherwise, as
well as -their other qualifications and fitness to be received
into the order. — Res. Iowa, 1855. We protest against all such
innovations. — Barber, C. F. C. Ark., 1856.

It is the sense of this Grand Lodge, that no man can
become a mason unless he can avow a belief in the princi-
ples contained in the Holy Bible, and that the demand for
such belief does not conflict with the universality of Freema-
sonry.—.Res. Neb., 1858.

. Resolved, That the Grand Lodge of Vermont will grant no
dispensations to any man or mason for the benefit of any
human confessor or confessional; and when any candidate
for the honors of Masonry shall express the least doubt as to
his duty at the confessional, the lodge to whom such candi-
date shall make application ought not to have the least doubt
in excluding him. — Vt., 1855. This your committee believe
to be correct. — Bierce, C. F. C. Ohio, 1856.

Literary Qualifications. — As a general rule, a man who
cannot read and write, should not be made a mason. There
may be exceptions, however. We think it is a matter that
should be left with the subordinate lodges, to decide as each
particular case may be presented.

There is no injunction in the Ancient Constitutions prohib-
iting the initiation of persons who are unable to read or
write ; yet, as speculative Freemasonry is a scientific institu-
tion, the Grand Lodge would discourage the initiation of such
candidates as highly inexpedient. — S. C. 1848.

CANDIDATES — PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS. 211

Every candidate must, previous to his initiation, subscribe
his name at full length to a declaration, &c. — Consts. Ca. and
Eng.

Any individual who cannot write is ineligible to be admitted
into the order. — Note to Const. Eng.

Nor shall any candidate be initiated who cannot read and
write. — Const. Ire.

Inability to write is not good ground for exclusion, if the
candidate possesses other requisite qualifications. — Texas,
1858.

I have met with.no ancient positive enactment forbidding
the admission of uneducated persons, even of those who can
neither read nor write. * * * From these facts, and this
method of reasoning, I am clearly of opinion, that a person
who cannot read and write is not legally qualified for admis-
sion.— Mackey, P. M. L.

We should hesitate to admit into the order one who could
neither read nor write. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 31.

No man should be made a mason who cannot write his
name. — J. W. S. Mitchell, 1856.

Free-born. — It is an ancient rule, that candidates for Ma-
sonry must be free-born. A slave cannot be made a mason.
It is established as a general rule, in the United States, that
persons of negro blood should not be made masons, even
though they may have been free-born. This, however, is a
matter which most Grand Lodges have wisely refrained from
legislating upon, as it is at least doubtful whether they can
interfere with the right of the individual members of a lodge
to select their own members. Within the United States
there are no regular lodges of negroes, and but few regular
masons among that class, though there are many irregular
lodges and irregular masons among them. The abstract right
of a lodge to initiate a negro, mulatto, Indian, Chinese, or in-
dividual of any blood or complexion, cannot be denied. The
question of such admission is one of expediency merely, and
is wisely left to the conservative judgment of each individual

212 CANDIDATES — PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS.

member of the lodge where such person may apply for admis-
sion to the order. If made in a regular lodge, they are enti-
tled to all the rights and privileges belonging to them as reg-
ular masons.

The persons admitted members of a lodge must be good
and true men, free-born, and of mature and discreet age ; no
bondmen, no woman, no immoral or scandalous men, but of
good report. — Ancient Charges, 1723.

A negro or mulatto applying for admission as a visitor,
may be examined, if he hail from a foreign jurisdiction ; but
he must not be, if made in an American lodge. — Morris, Am.
F.M., ii., 87.

Resolved, That all subordinate lodges under this jurisdic-
tion be instructed to admit no negro or mulatto, as visitor or
otherwise, under any circumstances whatever. — 111., 1851.

We should not be willing to admit a negro or a mulatto
into Masonry ; yet, if a negro, or a mulatto, or Indian should
present himself, and we found him to be a worthy brother-
mason, made so by a true and legally constituted lodge, we
should be bound to treat him as such. — C. F. C. ofN. if., 1852.

We are entirely averse to the principle of initiating or ad-
mitting persons of color who are made in this country. — King,
C.F. C.ofN. F.,1853.

This Grand Lodge has expressly interdicted all intercourse
with negro lodges, and with such pretended masons, as clan-
destine.— Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

In the opinion of your committee, this Grand Lodge should
cease all correspondence with any Grand Lodge authorizing)
in any way, masonic intercourse with negroes. — C. F. C. La.,
1856.

No Grand Lodge has authorized subordinates to initiate
negroes. — Bierce, Ohio, 1856.

It is not proper to initiate in our lodges persons of the
negro race ; and their exclusion is in accordance with masonic
law, and the Ancient Charges and Regulations. All lodges of
negroes in "North America are clandestine, and no one made

CANDIDATES — HOW MANY AT ONE MEETING. 213

in such a lodge should be admitted or examined by any reg-
ular lodge.— Hatch, C. F. C. of N. Y, 1851.

The colored race do not possess, in this country, the neces-
sary qualifications to be made masons. This is evident from
their position, and the universal influence of the law of asso-
ciation. They would not be met as equals, and where there
is no equality, there can be no Freemasonry. Colored per-
sons made in regular lodges, and producing legal vouchers,
would not be refused as visitors. — Hyneman, Ed. Mir. and
Key., 1859.

How Many at one Meeting.

The General Regulations of 1720 forbid the making of more
than five new brethren at one time, (meeting,) unless by dis-
pensation. This is still the general usage.

No lodge shall make more than five new brethren at one
time, * * * * unless by a dispensation from the Grand
Master or Iris Deputy. — Old Reg., 1721, iv.

A lodge has power to make but five new brethren at the
same time. — Consts. N. Y. and Min.

No lodge shall make more than five brethren at one time.
—Const. N. J.

Not more than five brethren can be made in one lodge on
the same day, * * * unless by dispensation. — Const Penn.

An excess of five candidates shall not be received on the
same day. — Comt. N. C.

No lodge shall, on any pretense, make more than five new
brothers in one day. — Const. S. C.

Not more than five new brothers shall be made in any one
lodge on the same day, unless by dispensation. — Const. Ga.

No lodge shall initiate more than five at the same meeting,
unless by dispensation. — Const. D. C.

No lodge shall confer the degrees upon more than five can-
didates at any one meeting ; nor shall more than one candidate
be initiated, passed, or raised, at one and the same time. —
Const. Cat.

No lodge shall confer the degrees upon more than five can-

214 CANDIDATES — HOW MAN! AT ONE TIME.

didates at one meeting, except by special dispensation from
the Grand or Deputy Grand Master. — Const. Oregon.

No lodge shall, on any pretense, make more than five new
brothers in one day, unless by dispensation. — Consts. England
and Ca.

No lodge shall initiate more than five candidates in one
session. — Const. Md.

How Many at one Time.
. It is not unusual to initiate, craft, and confer a part of the
third degree upon several candidates at one time. The pro-
priety, necessity, or correctness of such practice, may well be
doubted, and we hope that it will speedily become obsolete.
It cannot be done without a violation of both the spirit and
the letter of the ritual, and at the expense of its most impres-
sive lessons.

Resolved, That the Grand Lodge hereby forbids the subor-
dinate lodges from conferring any portion of either degree,
except the explanatory lectures, upon more than one candi-
date at a time. — Va., 1856.

It is not proper to introduce more than one candidate at
one and the same time in conferring the first and third
degrees. — Res. 111., 1845.

This Grand Lodge hereby forbids the subordinate lodges
within its jurisdiction to initiate, pass, or raise more than one
candidate at the same time. — Res. Conn., 1854.

I cannot believe that it is proper to confer the first section
of the first degree, the first section of the second degree, or
the first and second sections of the third degree, on more than
one candidate, at the same time, and by the same ceremony.
— Litch, G. M. of Va., 1856.

No lodge shall be allowed to initiate, pass, or raise more
than one candidate at the same time. — Res. Tenn., 1844.

Lodges are required and enjoined not to confer, under any
pretext or emergency, the working part of the first degree
upon more than one candidate at a time. — Reg. Miss.

We think it no violation of the Ancient Constitutions to ini>

CANDIDATES — HOW MANY AT ONE TIME. 215

date or pass as many as five candidates at a time. — English,
C.F. C. Ark., 1857.

Candidates should be initiated singly. — Lon. Mas. Q. R.t
1839, 265.

I think it improper to confer either of the symbolic degrees
upon more than one candidate at a time. — Morris, Am. F. M.t
iv., 77.

No lodge, in conferring either of the degrees, shall introduce
more than one candidate at the same time. — Const. Wis.

It is common usage to take two or more F. C.'s together
through the first section of the next degree ; but it is not cor-
rect practice, and should not be encouraged, though it may
sometimes be excused. — C. W. Moore, 1849.

Shall not initiate, pass, or raise more than one candidate at
the same time. — Reg. Tenn., 1857.

In conferring the first and third degrees, it is not proper to
introduce more than one candidate at one and the same time.
— Res. Ohio, 1844.

It is in accordance with correct usage to initiate or craft
more than one candidate at the same time ; but I recommend
much caution in the exercise of such right. — Hubbard, Ohio,
1852.

To initiate two candidates at one and the same time, is a
wide and dangerous deviation from the ancient landmarks of
the order.— Ark, 1846.

Lodges under this jurisdiction are directed and required
not to make more than one master mason at one and the same
time ; though the history of the degree may be given to any
number thus made. — Res. Mich., 1854.

Not more than one brother shall be raised at one time. — Ky.,
1853. To be avoided, except on occasions of most pressing
emergency. — S. C, 1853.

It is unmasonic to confer degrees upon more than one can-
didate at the same time. — Clark, G. M. Conn., 1854.

But one candidate should be initiated at the same time. —
Prescott, C. F. C. Min., 1857.

216 CANDIDATES— DEGREES AT THE SAME MEETING.

dumber of Degrees at the same Meeting.

Jrand Lodge Constitutions or Regulations usually specify
how many degrees may be conferred upon a candidate at one
and the same meeting. In the absence of such regulation,
the safest and only proper rule is, to confer but one degree at
the same meeting.

Neither shall any lodge be permitted to make and raise the
same brother, at one and the same meeting, without a dispen-
sation from the Grand Master, which, on very particular
occasions only, may be requested. — G. L. Eng., 1753.

No candidate can be admitted to more than one degree at
the same time, except by dispensation, or by the provisions
of the sixth section of article three of this Constitution. —
Const. N. H.

The conferring of more than one degree at the same com-
munication is left to the discretion of the lodge. — Const. Vt.

It shall not be regular to give more than one degree to the
same individual on the same day, unless a dispensation shall
have been obtained therefor. — G. L. Mass.

A candidate shall not receive more than one degree on one
day, without a dispensation from the Grand Master. — Const.
Venn.

Neither shall more than one degree be conferred on the
same day, except as above provided, (see " Previous Notice/')
unless due proficiency be attained in each advancing step, to
be manifested in open lodge. — Const. N. C.

No candidate can receive more than one degree in one
night. — Const. S. C.

Nor shall any lodge confer more than two degrees on any
applicant on the same day, without a dispensation. — Const. Ga.

No lodge shall confer more than one degree on the same
candidate at the same meeting, unless it be considered an ac-
tual case of emergency. — Const. Fla.

Nor shall any candidate receive more than one degree at
th*j same communication, unless by dispensation. — Const. D. C.

CANDIDATES — DEGREES AT THE SAME MEETING. 217

No person shall receive more than one degree at the same
communication. — Const. Ala.

No lodge shall confer more than one degree on the same
individual at the same meeting. — Const. Mo.

Nor shall there be conferred more than one degree upon
the same candidate at any one meeting of the lodge. — Consts.
Cal. and Oregon.

Nor shall a lodge be permitted to give more than one
degree to a brother on the same day. — Const Ca.

No candidate shall receive more than one degree at one
and the same meeting of the lodge. — Const. Me., 1820.

No lodge shall confer more than two degrees on one
brother at the same session, unless his be considered an ac-
tual case of emergency. — Const. Md.

No candidate shall receive more than two degrees at one
and the same meeting of the lodge, without first obtaining a
dispensation therefor. — Const. Me.

A lodge was reprimanded by the Grand Lodge (Massachu-
setts) for unmasonic conduct, and violation of the Constitu-
tion, for balloting for, and conferring on an initiate three
degrees in one and the same evening. — Proc. Mass., 1814.

This Grand Lodge prohibits its subordinates conferring
more than one degree upon the same candidate at one and
the same communication.— Res. Conn., 1858.

The lodges subordinate to this jurisdiction are forbidden to
confer more than one degree on the same candidate, at one
meeting, unless authorized by dispensation from one of the
first four officers of this Grand Lodge. — Res. R. I., 1857.

The practice of conferring more than one degree of an even-
ing, is an e^il, and should be abolished at once, or only indulged
in in very extreme cases. — Stewaet, G. M. of N. J., 1856.

Two degrees shall not be conferred on the same person
on the same day, except by dispensation, nor at any time,
unless the candidate pass due examination. — Reg. Miss. Reg.
Ark.

218 CANDIDATES — OBJECTIONS TO.

No lodge shall confer more than one degree on any brother
on the same day. — Const. Eng.

No lodge shall confer more than one degree on the same
individual at the same meeting. — Const. Kansas.

No lodge shall confer more than two degrees, at one com
nmnication, on the same candidate. — Mackey, P. M. L., 114.

It is just as masonic to give a candidate three degrees in
one day as two ; but all philosophy and analogy is violated by
giving more than one. — Morris, Am. F. M., iv., 45.

Objections to a Candidate.

Any member of the lodge has the right to object to the ad-
mission (or advancement) of any candidate, at any time before
the 0. B. ; and such objection is sufficient to bar the progress
of the candidate, even though the objector does not divulge
his reasons. If he voluntarily and openly divulge his reasons
to the lodge, we are of opinion that they then become the prop-
erty of the lodge ; and if a majority decide that they are not
sufficient, we think the brother is morally and masonically
bound to withdraw them. So long as he keeps them to him-
self, they are his own private property ; but as soon as they
are divulged to the lodge, they become the propertjT of the
lodge, to be disposed of as the lodge may see fit to determine.

Any member of a subordinate lodge may object to the initia-
tion, passing, or raising of a candidate, at any time before the
degree is conferred ; and it shall be the duty of the lodge to
investigate such objections before proceeding further with
the candidate. — Const. Mass.

(See resolution of Vermont, &c, under the head of "Secrecy
of the Ballot.")

If the lodge should consider the reasons of the objection*
not valid, still it cannot elect and initiate the candidate, as the
objecting brother's ballot has its full operation, however im-
proper may be the motives which control it. The candidate
is as fully rejected by it as by any other ballot. If such

* When vol'intarily given to the lodge.

CANDIDATES — OBJECTIONS TO. 219

brother give his reasons voluntarily, and they are wholly
selfish, frivolous, revengeful, or vindictive, and are founded
upon no moral objection, he leaves open a fair inquiry as to
himself, whether his action is correctly masonic, which his
lodge may investigate, if it thinks fit. Such an investigation
might, perhaps, in a very strong case, lead to suspension or
expulsion.— Tucker, G. M. Vt, 1852.

In 1851, the Grand Lodge of Texas affirmed the decision of
a subordinate lodge in suspending a member for " maliciously
stopping the advancement of a fellow-craft, for purposes un-
connected with Masonry, and to lend his personal aid to a
man not a mason."

The right to cast the black ball is unquestionable. — G. M.
Oregon, 1856.

Resolved, That at any time before the initiation of a candi-
date, upon the objection of any member of the lodge, upon the
statement of his reasons for said objection, the lodge may de-
termine as to whether he shall be initiated or not. — Mich.,
1857. Sound doctrine.— C. F. C. Texas, 1858.

A member may object to one on other grounds than immor-
ality or unmasonic conduct. — G. M. of Ark., 1856.

No candidate negatived with two nays shall have the priv-
ilege of a second ballot. But if there be but one negative, he
may (on supposition of some mistake) have that favor granted ;
and if in that second ballot there be still one negative only,
then that negative shall, if demanded, give to a committee of
three, five, or seven, (said committee to be chosen by the
lodge,) his reasons, which, if satisfactory to said committee, his
vote shall be confirmed, and the party stand negatived ; but
if unsatisfactory, or if he refuses to give his reasons, or dis-
cover himself, his negative shall be of none effect. And, in
either case, a member or brother that discloses the proceed-
ings of that night, shall be excluded from the lodge, if a mem-
ber, and for ever disqualified for a reception, if a visiting
brother. — By-law o/1739.

After the balloting, or the initiation, or passing, or even

220 CANDIDATES — OBJECTIONS TO.

while raising — at any point of time before the signing of the
by-laws — a single individual member of a lodge, who is him-
self in good standing, who may learn, subsequent to the bal-
loting, of any fact which, if known at the time of balloting,
would have justified him in casting a negative vote, is in duty
bound to object to the advancement of the candidate, or new
brother. He is not bound to explain, or give his reasons ;
and is not to be compelled ; nor is he bound to expose his
secret to any one. One single objector in such case is all
that is requisite. His objection is good, even though the
candidate has received part of the degree only ; or even when
he has been finished on the last degree, but has not signed
the by-laws. But it cannot undo what has been done. The
candidate must stop then, and stand at that point, until the
objection is removed or withdrawn ; and is bound to secrecy
by his first or entering engagements. — Hatch, C.F. C. ofN. Y.,
1850.

It is a settled principle in Masonry, that one black ball
rejects without a question, except a second ballot may be
called, to be satisfied of no mistake. — Com. Md., 1849.

An election does not invest in the candidate an indefeas-
ible right to the degrees, but the lodge is bound to stop at
any point when they find him unworthy ; and if the objec-
tions to his advancement are of that serious nature that would
justify suspension or expulsion, it is the duty of the lodge to
prefer charges and try him. — Com. Ark, 1852.

Any member of a subordinate lodge may object to the ini-
tiation, passing, or raising a candidate at any time before the
degree is conferred. — Res^ Tenn., 1853. Such (above) we
understand to be the rule of Masonry. — C. W. Moore. It is
not the duty of a brother to state objections to a candidate
before ballot, or the right of a lodge to require its members
to state such objections at any time. — Lewis, G. M. of N. Y.,
1858. Fuller, C. F. C. Tenn., 1858.

A brother is not required to black-ball a candidate against
whom he has and knows no objection, at the hail of another
brother. — lb.

CANDIDATES OBJECTIONS TO. 221

An abuse of the right of ballot for candidates by a brother,
is a disciplinable offense ; and hence, where a brother waived
his privilege of secrecy, and avowed an unworthy motive for
balloting against a candidate, he was subject to charges. —
Lewis, G.M.ofN. Y, 1858.

Advancement in the degrees may be stayed at any time,
for good reasons, by the lodge or the Master. — Res. Ul.s 1857.

Whenever objection is made by a member of any lodge
under this jurisdiction, in good standing, to the conferring of
any of the degrees of Masonry upon an applicant who may
have been elected to receive the same, it shall not be lawful
to confer said degrees, or either of them, until such objections
shall have been withdrawn by the brother so making them. —
Res. D. C, 1857.

We hold, that so soon as objection ware made in open lodge
to the promotion of a candidate, it was the duty of the Mas-
ter to have ordered the ballot to be taken. — Com. S. C, 1853.

I decided that a member, after the election of a candidate,
could object to the conferring of the degrees, without making
known the nature of his objections, and the lodge could not
confer the degree until the objections were withdrawn by the
member making them. — Frailey, G. M. of D. C, 1855.

When an applicant to be passed has been wrongfully
rejected, this Grand Lodge has no power to investigate — no
jurisdiction over the matter — and can grant no relief. — Ala.,
1855.

The lodge is bound to presume that it was done for good
and sufficient reasons. It is a matter for which the brother
casting the negative must answer to his own conscience alone.
There is no other tribunal before which he can be arraigned.
— C. W. Moore, 1844.

A member is under a constructive obligation to vote
against an unworthy applicant for admission, and his refusal
or willful neglect to do so, would subject him to the discipline
of his lodge. — lb.

Where a member came in after a candidate had been

CANDIDATES — OBJECTIONS TO.

accepted, and claimed a right to ballot, held, that the ballot
could not be reconsidered, and of his objections to the candi-
date, the lodge was then the sole judge. When the question
is pending, a member may avow his vote without being re-
quired to give reasons ; but when, after the ballot is recorded,
he claims the right to negative the decision already had, the
lodge may demand his reasons, and judge of their sufficiency.
— C. W. Moore.

The advai. cement of a candidate may be arrested at any
stage, for good cause. — Smith, G. M. Ark., 1856.

An objector has the undoubted right, to black-ball an appli-
cant at all stages of his application. The open avowal of an
objecting brother does not allow the lodge to pass upon his
right, or upon the sufficiency of his reasons, or to question
him upon his reasons. — Miss., 1854.

Any member may object to the initiation, passing, or rais-
ing a candidate, at any time before the degree is conferred. —
Reg. Tenn., 1857.

It is competent for the Master or the lodge to demand of a
member his reasons for voting against a candidate for the
degrees.— C. F. C. Cat., 1851.

Communicating to an applicant for the degrees, or to any
one not a master mason, objections that have been made to
the character or standing of the applicant, by a member of
the lodge, or a visitor therein, is a breach of masonic duty
and obligation ; and a brother so offending should be charged,
tried, and, if found guilty, be reprimanded, suspended, or ex-
pelled, according to the circumstances of the case. — Hubbard,
Ohio, 1851.

No one should be initiated against the ballot of a sitting
member, although the whole lodge may have (even) good
reasons to beUeve the dissentient member wrong; as, while
he remains a member, his vote is to be held equal to that of
any other. — lb.

Any regular member has the right to oppose the initiation
or advancement of a candidate at any time — lb.

CANDIDATES— OBJECTIONS TO. 223

One who black-balls a candidate, from personal motives, is
not to be dealt with otherwise than by friendly advice.— lb.

It is competent for a lodge to refuse to initiate a candidate
after he has been " duly elected." It is its duty to do so if
any one of its regular members objects; though the ob-
jection, or the reason for it, did not exist at the time the bal-
lot was had. — lb.

There is no foundation in Masonry for supposing that an
objector to an applicant for initiation must state his reasons
for objecting ; or, if the applicant has already taken one or
more degrees, that the objector must prefer charges against
him.— Downey, G. M. Lid., 1857.

It is highly improper to postpone a ballot where a black
ball appears. — 111., 1856.

At any time before the initiation of a candidate, upon the
objection of any member of the lodge, upon the statement of
his reasons for said objection, the lodge may determine as to
whether he shall be initiated or not. — Res. Mich., 1857.

A brother black-balling an applicant, cannot withdraw his
objections after the second stated meeting subsequent to such
rejection. — Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

It is a violation of the Constitutions of Masonry to call upon
a brother to state his reasons for casting a black ball. — Iowa,
1849.

After a report, in all cases, the candidate should be balloted
for, unless the report be recommitted to the same committee.
—Iowa, 1852.

The ballot should always be spread, whether the committee
report favorably or unfavorably. — Smith, G. M. Ark., 1856.

A brother has a right to protest against conferring a degree ;
and if the record shows that the candidate had been elected,
the protest should also be entered, that the rejection may
appear. — Texas, 1858.

If the report of the committee is unfavorable, the candidate
sho uld be considered as rejected, without any reference to a

224 CANDIDATES — OBJECTIONS TO.

ballot.— Mackey, P. M. £., 189. We think differently.-—
J. W. S. Mitchell, 1853.

One black ball, with a good reason assigned, of the suf-
ficiency of which the Master shall be a competent judge, or
two black balls* without any reason at all being assigned,
will reject a candidate for initiation. — Mackey, Lexicon, 400.

Though a member should give the reasons for his vote, the
lodge has not the power to overrule them. — Morris, Am.
F. 31., ii., 14.

A brother can black-ball an applicant on any ground he
pleases. The lodge cannot control this matter. It is one of
private judgment. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 115.

If the adoption of an unfavorable report rejects an appli-
cant, then it follows, by logical inference, that adopting a fa-
vorable report elects him. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 131. A
consistent view of the matter. — G-. W. 0.

After a black ball has been cast, it cannot legally be with-
drawn by proxy. — Morris, Am. F. M., hi., 18. It has always
been our opinion, that in case of the withdrawal of objections,
the applicant is to be considered elected without a further
ballot.— lb., 129.

A ballot should be had in all cases, whatever the report of
the committee may be. The candidate cannot be recorded as
rejected until the ballot is cast, and the result officially de-
clared. It is the business of the committee to investigate; it
is for the lodge to decide. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev., xiii., 304.

An individual can be kept back from the degrees of
Masonry, after having taken one degree, upon evidence of im-
proper conduct prior to initiation. — N. C, 1850.

There is but one way of rejecting a candidate, and that is
by secret ballot. — J. W. S. Mitchell, 1855.

If I believe that a man will not, in good faith and with all

* Most of the Grand Lodges in the United States require unanimity in the bal-
lot; but the Old Constitutions permitted as many as three black balls, if th«
»C ige desired it.

CANDIDATES — OBJECTIONS TO. 225

his heart, comply with all his obligations to me, through
pcnuriousness, selfishness, indolence, personal antipathy, or
any other like defect of character, I not only nuiy, but I ouglri
to refuse to assume those obligations towards him; and none
have a right to ask my reasons. — Albert Pike. We regard
this as sound reasoning. — Editor Ashler, 1856. We coincide.
— G. W. C.

Where a candidate was elected, and a member not present
afterward, and before the degrees were conferred, came in
and objected, held, proper to commit, to hear and investigate
{he objections, and, on report, to require a further and unani-
mous ballot. — Com. Juris. G. G. Chap., 1856.

Advancement may be stayed at anytime, for good reasons,
by the lodge or Master. — Res. HI., 1857.

Where objections are made after clear ballot, I think a vote
of two-thirds should be required to withhold what the unani-
mous ballot entitled to. — Anderson, G. M. EL, 1855. Grand
Lodge do.

After a candidate is elected, if objections be made, it is the
duty of the Master to withhold the degree, and investigate.
A member present when the ballot is taken, and afterward
objects, should state his reasons. A member not present at
the ballot, and who afterward objects, cannot be required to
disclose his reasons. — G. M. Texas, 1857.

A brother may privately inform the presiding officer that
he objects to the initiation of the candidate, in which case the
Master will announce, at the proper time, that objection is
made, and declare the candidate rejected. — Morris, Am.
F. M., v., 68.

A simple declaration from any member of the lodge that he
objects to the applicant, is equivalent to a black ball, even
after a clear ballot. — lb., iii., 65. Bounden duty of lodge to
withhold the degree, so long as any one member shall object,
no matter what the state of the ballot may have been. — lb., 177.

Candidate, after clear ballot, may be rejected before initia-
tion, even by the objection of one member. — Ky., 1813.
10*

226 CANDIDATES — PETITIONS FOE DEGREES, ETC.

Petitions for Degrees.
According to the present and well-established usage, all
petitions for the degrees must be made in writing, signed by
the applicant, recommended by one or more members of the
lodge to which such application is made, and presented at a
stated meeting. A lodge has an undoubted right to receive,
or to refuse to receive, such petition — a majority being suf-
ficient to determine. If no objection be made to the recep-
tion of the petition, it may be ordered on file, and the usual
committee of investigation appointed, by the Master, without
a formal vote.

Withdrawal of Petitions.
After a petition has been presented to a lodge, and accepted,
(received,) it should not be withdrawn. It cannot consistently
be withdrawn at any time, except at the personal request of
the petitioner. We do not acknowledge the right or the jus-
tice of allowing any friend of the petitioner to withdraw such
petition. The only party that can correctly ask such permis-
sion, is the petitioner himself; and the only party that can
grant it, is the lodge. For the lodge to grant such permis-
sion, without such request and for good reasons, is not, in
our opinion, correct or consistent.

No subordinate lodge should allow any petition to be with-
drawn after it is presented to the lodge. — C. F. C, N. H., 1852.

Neither permit them to withdraw their petition, without
subjecting them to the negative vote.— G. M. of Mass., 1856.

No petition for initiation, when once before the lodge, can
be withdrawn. — Const. Md.

A petition to be made a mason, after being presented and
referred, cannot be withdrawn, but must be acted upon by
report of committee and ballot. — Const. N. Y.

An unfavorable report having been made by a committee,
can a petition be withdrawn? Ans. It cannot. Great evil
grows out of the withdrawal of petitions, and it should never
be permitted. — Morris-

CANDIDATES — WITHDRAWAL OF PETITIONS. 22 «

A petition is the property of the lodge. If a candidate is
rejected, she may return it to him, or retain it, at her discre-
tion.—G. itf. of Ark., 1856.

After the petition of an applicant is read, and referred to a
committee of investigation, it then becomes the property of
the lodge, and cannot, under any circumstances, be withdrawn ;
but the usual mode of disposing of it must be observed, to
accept or reject it by ballot. — Bain of N. C, 1858.

Although it is the practice in lodges to permit a petition
to be withdrawn before the ballot, yet the proceeding is not
considered as masonic or just. So far as we can remember,
the entire weight of authority is adverse to the practice.
Brother Moore, of the Freemason's Magazine, considers that,
after a petition has been presented, it should not be allowed
to be withdrawn ; and he very sensibly adds : " Let the mem-
bers of our lodges take the trouble to ascertain the true
character of their friends before they propose them, and
there will seldom be occasion to ask leave to withdraw peti-
tions."— Chase, Mas. Jour., 1856.

No subordinate lodge should allow any petition to be with-
drawn after it is presented to the lodge. — Hatch, C. F. C. of
N. Y., 1851. This is the rule we have long labored to estab-
lish.— Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 95.

No lodge, under any circumstances, should ever tolerate a
petition for the degrees to be withdrawn, after it has been
presented and referred. — Htam, G. M. of CaL, 1853.

No petition for the degrees can or should be withdrawn,
after it has been received by the lodge, except such as are
reported favorably upon. — Tenn., 1853.

A petition of a candidate, after being presented and refer-
red to a committee, cannot be withdrawn ; but the committee
must report, and a ballot be had, in all cases. — Lewis, G. M.
ofN. Y.,1858.

After a petition is regularly received by a lodge, and entered
upon its minutes, it shall not be withdrawn, except by consent
of three-fourths of the members present. — Const. Neb.

228 CANDIDATES — WITHDRAWAL OF PETITIONS.

A petition for initiation may be withdrawn before being
acted on by the lodge, if the report of the committee thereon
be favorable — not otherwise. — Reg. Miss. Res. Tenn., 1857.

The practice of withdrawing petitions is peculiar to the
United States. It is, in our judgment, a wrong and danger-
ous practice. — C. W. Moore, 1846.

The friends of a petitioner should never be allowed to
withdraw his petition after the committee have made their
report, especially if it be unfavorable to him. — lb., 1848.

After a petition for initiation or membership is received, it
shall not be withdrawn, unless on application before the com-
mittee report upon it, for good cause shown, at a stated meet-
ing, and by consent of three-fourths of the members present.
— Res. Ind., 1848.

A petition once received, should not be withdrawn, but
acted on. — Ohr, C. F. C. Md., 1849. A petition for initiation
once received, cannot be withdrawn, except by unanimous
consent. — Ky., 1842. Should in no case be withdrawn after
reference to the committee. — J. W. S. Mitchell, 1853.

A petition for initiation or membership presented to a
lodge, becomes the property of the lodge, and cannot, on any
consideration, be withdrawn ; but a ballot must be had, in all
cases, on the report of the committee. — Res. Cal., 1854.

A petition, after its reception by the lodge, is the property
of the lodge, and cannot be withdrawn without the assent of
the lodge. It would be best not to allow it to be withdrawn
in any case of unfavorable report, or if a negative vote be
suspected. — Mellen, Acacia, 1855.

When a petition is received and entered on the minutes, it
is the property of the lodge, and cannot be withdrawn unless
by a three-fourths vote of the lodge. — Ohio, 1837.

A petition, after being rejected, can be withdrawn by order
of the lodge ; but the better rule is, to have it remain in the
possession of the lodge. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

Wrong to allow petitions to be withdrawn before a ballot.
— EL, 1855. A petition cannot be withdrawn after reference,

CANDIDATES — WITHDRAWAL OF PETITIONS. 229

nnder any circumstances, whether the report thereon be
favorable or not. — Ditto. Anderson, G. M. do.

A petition for the degrees cannot be withdrawn from a
lodge, unless favorably reported upon by the committee of
investigation, and then only by unanimous vote of the lodge.
— Res. Min., 1858.

A petition may be withdrawn, with the unanimous consent
of the lodge, before its reference to an investigating commit-
tee, but not afterwards. — Const. Iowa, 1844.

No petition can or should be withdrawn after it has been
received by the lodge. — Term., 1853.

Hereafter, petitions may be withdrawn from any of the sub-
ordinate lodges at any time before the ballot shall have been
spread in any case. — ML, 1852.

After a petition has been received and referred, it shall not
be withdrawn. — Ark, 1853. Standard By-laws of Ark., 1857.
N. C, 1851.

The practice of withdrawing petitions, under any circum-
stances, is at least of doubtful propriety ; but they certainly
should not be withdrawn after unfavorable report. — Mo., 1857.

No lodge shall allow any petition to be withdrawn after it
has been received by the lodge. — Texas, 1847.

We suppose it to be well settled, that after a reference to
a committee, a petition cannot be withdrawn. — Abell, C. F. C.
of Col., 1858.

A petition cannot be withdrawn after an unfavorable
report. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 3.

No petition should be withdrawn after it is received by the
lodge. — Morris, Am. F. M., iv., 36.

The practice is wrong — entirely wrong. — C. Moore, Mas.
Rev., x., 42. A vote allowing a petition to be withdrawn
cannot be reconsidered at a subsequent meeting, as the peti-
tion is no longer before, or in possession of the lodge. — lb.t
xv., 128. We agree with the above opinions. — G. W. C.

230 CANDIDATES — RENEWAL OP PETITIONS.

■Renewal of Petitions, after Eejection.

Several of the Grand Lodges require that a specified period
shall elapse before an applicant, who has once been rejected,
can again apply for initiation, while the others are silent upon
the point. In the absence of such Grand Lodge regulation,
each subordinate lodge can fix the time for itself, by a special
by-law, or it may leave itself free to accept or refuse such pe-
tition at any and all times, as it may please to decide in each
individual case. The latter is the better, and, in our opinion,
the only just course.

The following Grand Lodges require that one year should
elapse after a petition for initiation has been rejected in a
lodge, before the candidate can make a second application :
Kentucky, Indiana, North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Dis-
trict of Columbia, Missouri, California, Oregon, Yermont,
Mississippi, Kansas, Texas, (1852.)

Six months is the time required in the following jurisdictions :
New York, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota and Canada.

In Texas, one black ball rejects for one year, two for two
years, and three or more for three years. — Const. Texas.

A new petition from the same candidate may be received
at a subsequent stated communication, and acted upon. —
C.F. C.ofN. H., 1852.

A rejected candidate must present a new petition upon a
second application to be made a mason, his first petition hav-
ing been rejected; it being a petition that is rejected or
accepted, and not a candidate. — Lewis, G. M. of N. Y., 1858.

There is no regulation in the Constitutions of Masonry that
requires a rejected candidate to remain one year before he
can again be proposed for initiation. Nor is such practice
the general usage. Where it exists, it is by virtue of a par-
ticular Grand Lodge regulation, or local usage of the lodges, and
is inoperative beyond the jurisdiction within which it is thus
sanctioned. Lodges are free to judge for themselves, and to
decide, each for itself, until the Grand Lodge has passed upon
the subject — C. W. Moore, 1848.

CANDIDATES — PREVIOUSLY REJECTED. 231

In England, and in those American Grand jurisdictions not
mentioned in this section, there is no fixed time when a re-
jected applicant may be re-proposed. — G. W. C.

If a candidate is rejected, there is the end of the matter,
and a new petition must be presented before his name can
again properly come before the lodge for a ballot. — C. W.
Moore.

If proposed again, it shall be in the same manner as though
he had never been mentioned in the lodge. — By-laws 1796.

There is no fixed rule in relation to the time that must
elapse before a re-petition after rejection. — Hubbard, Ohio,
1851

This is altogether a local regulation. If the local regula-
tions are silent, the second application may be made at any
time after the rejection of the first. The second application
must be governed by the same rules as an original one. —
Mackey, P. M. L., ii., 111.

After the prescribed period has elapsed, a petition must be
presented and acted upon exactly as if it had never before
oeen presented. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 77. In which
opinion we coincide. — G. W. C.

There is no general law relative to the time a rejected ap-
plicant must wait before he can renew his application. The
more common usage is twelve months. — Morris, Am. F. M.,
iv.,92.

Candidates Previously Rejected

An applicant for initiation, who has been once rejected,
should never be received in any other lodge, without the
consent of the lodge which rejected him. The fact that he
has removed into another jurisdiction does not weaken the
force of the rule. The lodge which previously rejected him
has a right to object to his initiation, and its objection should
be held valid, and sufficient to estop him. The above is a
strict interpretation of the general rule, and only weighty rea-
sons should be allowed to relax or suspend it in any particu-
lar case.

232 CANDIDATES — PREVIOUSLY REJECTED.

No canlidate, whose application may be rejected by a
lodge, shall be initiated in any lodge under this jurisdiction,
other than the one to which he first applied, without the
recommendation of six members of said lodge, of whom the
Master and Wardens shall be three. * * * If any mason
knowingly assist, or recommend for initiation, to any lodge
whatever, any candidate rejected as aforesaid, who may not
have obtained a recommendation as before provided, such
mason shall be expelled* from the institution. — Consts. Me.
and Mass.

In New York, a lodge cannot initiate an applicant pre-
viously rejected in any lodge, until six months after such re-
jection.

In Pennsylvania and Massachusetts, an applicant for ini-
tiation must state in his application whether he has ever been
rejected by any lodge.

No lodge shall initiate any candidate, who has been rejected
by another lodge, within one year after such rejection ; and
then only upon the recommendation of seven members of the
lodge by whom the rejection was made, if it is in existence, of
whom three shall be the Master and Wardens. — Const. D. C.

In Virginia, no rejected applicant for initiation can be ini-
tiated in any lodge within one year from such rejection.

No candidate whose application may be rejected in any
lodge under this jurisdiction, shall be entered, passed, or
raised in any other lodge which shall have received official
notice of such rejection. — Const. Ga.

Nor can a candidate, who has been once rejected, be know-
ingly received by any other lodge under this jurisdiction,
without the consent of the lodge which rejected him. — Fla.

No rejected applicant for initiation or membership shall be
initiated or received a member in any other lodge, without
the consent of a majority of the lodge which rejected him. —
Const. Ala.

* I. S. was expelled by the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, 1855, for the
ado\6 offense.

CANDIDATES — PREVIOUSLY REJECTED. 233

A rejected applicant for initiation or membership shall not
apply to any other lodge, without the recommendation of at
least five members of the lodge which rejected him, two of
whom must be of the firs; three officers of the lodge. — Const.
La.

No lodge shall knowingly receive any candidate, in either
of the degrees, who has been rejected by any other lodge,
without first receiving the unanimous consent of the lodge
that rejected him Const. 111.

No lodge can initiate a candidate who has been previously
rejected in another lodge under the jurisdiction, without the
written recommendation of the Master and Wardens of the
lodge which rejected him. — Const. Mich.

A lodge shall not act upon the petition of one who has at
any time before been rejected, except all the members should
be present who acted in the instance of the rejection, unless
by special dispensation of the Grand Master. — Const. Iowa.

No applicant for initiation or membership whose petition
may have been rejected by any lodge, shall be initiated or re-
ceived in any other lodge. — Const. Mo.

No lodge shall confer any degree upon any person who has
been rejected by another lodge, without the unanimous con-
sent of such lodge, if in existence. — Const. Texas.

Resolved, That in all cases where application for initiation
into the mysteries of Masonry has been rejected by a subor-
dinate lodge, in the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, it shall
not be competent for any other subordinate lodge to receive
a petition from such rejected person until after the expiration
of twelve months after such rejection, without the consent of
the lodge rejecting the applicant. — Ky., 1857.

In Ohio, lodges are required to satisfy themselves by a test,
or otherwise, whether the candidate has been rejected in some
other lodge ; and if he has, they must be satisfactorily con-
vinced that such rejection has not been on account of any
circumstances that ought to preclude him from the benefits
of Masonry ; otherwise they cannot initiate him.

234 CANDIDATES — PREVIOUSLY REJECTED.

The majority of a lodge can, at any regular stated meeting
thereof, recommend a rejected candidate for initiation to a
neighboring lodge, which can then initiate him, on a petition
and reference, and an unanimous vote. — Hatch, C. F. C. of
N. Y., 1851.

In Nebraska, a lodge must be satisfactorily convinced that
such rejection has not been on account of any circumstances
that ought to preclude him from the benefits of Masonry;
otherwise the interdiction is positive and peremptory.

A candidate rejected in any lodge cannot be received by
another lodge, without the unanimous consent of the lodge
which rejected him. — Reg. Miss., 1857. Ky., 1842.

A lodge cannot receive a petition from one previously re-
jected, without consent of the lodge which rejected him.
The fact that the petitioner does not now live in the juris-
diction of the lodge which rejected him, does not change
the force of the rule. — Anderson, G. M. III., 1855. Grand
Lodge do.

No lodge can initiate a candidate previously rejected in
another lodge. — Mackey, P. M. L., 113.

It is legal for a lodge to recommend, by an unanimous vote,
an applicant to a neighboring lodge, even though he has just
been rejected. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 187.

The Constitutions do not prevent a candidate who has been
rejected in one lodge from being elected in another, provided
the articles are strictly enforced. — F. M. Lon. Qu., 1839, 551

ADVANCEMENT

The rule prescribed by the ritual, in regard to advance-
rs ent, is, that the candidate must have made suitable proficiency
in the preceding degree or degrees. To this rule it provides
for no exceptions, and it is to be regretted that any have been
allowed in practice. There is no general rule regulating the
time that must elapse between the several degrees ; but the
better opinion seems to be, that one month, at least, ought to
intervene between them.

All entered apprentices must work one month as such be-
fore they can be passed to the degree of fellow craft. All
fellow crafts must work in a lodge of crafts one month before
they can be raised to the sublime degree of master mason. —
Const N. H,

Ordered, That from and after the passage of this order, it
shall not be regular to give more than one degree to the same
individual on the same day, nor at a less interval than one
month from his receiving the previous degree, unless a dis-
pensation shall have been obtained therefor. — G. L. Mass., 1843.

Nor shall the third degree ever be conferred in a less in-
terval than four weeks from the time of initiation, except by
dispensation from the Grand Master or his Deputy, nor with-
out proof of proficiency before advancement.— Const. N. Y.

A candidate shall not receive more than one degree on one
day; nor a subsequent degree at a less interval than one
month from his reception of a former degree, without dispen-
sation from the Grand Master. — Const. Venn.

Nor shall a higher degree of Masonry be conferred on any
brother, at a less interval than one month from his receiving
a previous degree, except by dispensation. — Const. S. C.

ADVANCEMENT — TIME OF.

All petitions must lie over one month, and there shall be at
least that time between the conferring of each of the succeed-
ing degrees, unless by dispensation, in a case of actual emer-
gency.— Const. JD. C.

Every brother shall serve as entered apprentice at least one
month before passing to the more honorable degree of fellow
craft ; and every fellow craft shall labor at least one month
before raising to the degree of master mason, unless oy dis-
pensation from the Grand Master, Deputy, or District Deputy
Grand Master, or Grand Lecturer, and unanimous consent of
the lodge. — Const. Texas.

Nor shall a higher degree in Masonry be conferred on any
brother at a less interval than one month from his receiving
a previous degree. — Const. Ca.

By our practice, one month must intervene before a candi-
date can be advanced. Cases may occur when it is proper to
confer all the degrees at the same time, such as often happens
among sea-faring men, or persons suddenly leaving the coun-
try.—Haswell, C. F. C. of Vi, 1851.

An E. A. must remain at least two years in that degree. An
F. C. must work at least a year before he can be admitted to
the third degree. — Grand Lodge of Hanover.

One stated meeting shall elapse between the conferring of
each degree. — Res. Tenn., 1844.

A higher degree shall not be conferred at a less interval
than four weeks from his receiving a previous degree. —
Const. Eng.

Not less than two weeks between each degree, except in
particular cases of emergency, and by consent of the Master
and Wardens. — Const. Scot.

Not less than two weeks between the degrees, unless the
candidate show, on examination in open lodge, that he is fully
qualified to advance to the next degree. — CaL, 1851.

One lunar month between the degrees. — Ky., 1853.

* * * Hence we derive the law, that a month at least

ADVANCEMENT — BALLOT OR VOTE ON. 23 1

must intervene between the reception of one degree and the
advancement to another. But this rule is also subject to a
dispensation. — Mackey, P. M. L., 229.

The ritual of the Grand Lodge of Switzerland requires an
interval of one year between each degree. — G. "Vv . C.

Entered apprentices shall serve five months before they
ire passed to the second degree ; and three months a fellow
craft before they obtain the sublime degree of Master. —
Const. Ga., 1791. Entered apprentices shall serve three
months before being passed to the degree of fellow craft ;
and fellow crafts must serve two months before being raised
to the degree of master mason, unless by dispensation. — Ga.,
1830.

In France and Germany, the usual period of probation is
one year between each degree. — Vide London F. M. Mag.,
1855, 221. Mir. and Key., 1856, 130.

Ballot, or Vote, on Advancement.

Whether a separate ballot should be taken for each degree,
or one ballot suffice for all, is a question yet involved in doubt.
Much may be said on both sides. The latter is the practice
in this jurisdiction, and the one we believe to be preferable,
so long as only master masons are allowed the privilege of
the ballot.

The vote to advance a brother to any degree of Masonry,
should be as unanimous as the vote which admits him as a
member. — Const. Fla.

A separate ballot shall be had for each degree. — Consts.
D. C. and La.

A separate ballot should, in all cases, be taken prior to the
conferring of each degree, and one negative defeats the can-
didate.— Res. Col., 1851.

The practice in most of our lodges is, to require a separate
ballot in a Master's lodge on each degree, and we do not sub-
scribe to the doctrine that the candidate, once initiated, is, by
virtue of that act, entitled to receive the other two degrees.
— Haswell, C. F. C. Vt, 1851.

238 ADVANCEMENT — BALLOT OR VOTE ON.

I am clearly of the opinion, that one ballot entitles the can-
didate to the three degrees. — Hobbs, G. M. 111., 1850.

A ballot for each degree, separately, is an undeniable right,
when demanded.— Const N. Y.

Balloting for all the degrees given in the lodge at one and
the same time, is the practice in this commonwealth ; and we
think it the proper practice, as it certainly is the oldest we
have in this country.* — C. W. Moore.

We think that no one should be initiated, passed, or raised,
or admitted a member of a lodge, without the unanimous
concurrence of all the members present when the ballot is
taken.— C. F. C. of R. L, 1850.

I object, in toto, to balloting for the degrees separately.—
G. M. ofK C., 1847.

No brother can be advanced to a higher degree without a
ballot duly taken, which must be without a black ball. —
Brown, C. F. C. Fla., 1854.

To the above, Brother King, (C. F. C. of N. Y., 1855,) says:
" This is, of course, the law of that jurisdiction, or it would
not have been given as such by Brother Brown ; but it is not
the law of New York, nor of many other states. A hundred
or more years since, when the second and third degrees were
conferred only in Grand Lodge, on special application there-
for, such a law was important and necessary ; but, since all
the degrees have come to be conferred in subordinate lodges,
we suppose one ballot to be sufficient, unless, on the advance-
ment of the candidate, a member requests another ballot,
when we believe it to be indispensable ; and, in this case, if a
negative ballot appears, it rejects the applicant."

To this, Brother Storer, (C. F. C. Conn., 1856,) says: "Un-
doubtedly this is orthodox doctrine, though the practice in
Connecticut is supposed to be in accordance with the rule laid
down by Brother Brown. We have seen both plans pursued
in this state, but we believe the general practice of Q~a
lodges now, is to ballot for each degree.

* This is the usage in England.— G. W. C

ADVANCEMENT — BALLDT OR VOTE ON. 239

The committee (C. F. C. of Miss., 1849) very properly dis-
agree with the Grand Master of Maine. (1848,) that " a candi
date initiated into the first, has a right to the other two
degrees." They say, " we cannot admit this doctrine." Nei-
ther can we.— Hatch, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1850.

Several Grand Lodges have decided that a ballot for each
degree is requisite, and some of them require it by a pro-
vision in their Constitution. Among them are Maryland, Dis-
trict of Columbia, Indiana and Florida. The practice is
variant in New York in the subordinates. — Hatch, C. F. C.
ofN. 7., 1851.

The taking a ballot on all the degrees, seems to us to be a
needless, and, therefore, a useless practice. — lb., 1852.

It is believed to be the general practice in this state, and
many others, to take but a single ballot (and that in the Mas-
ter's degree) for initiation in all the degrees, and not to ballot
for each degree separately. — C. F. C. of Wis., 1852.

It is clearly the opinion of this Grand Steward's Lodge, that
an article ought to be embodied in our Constitution, requiring
lodges to ballot in each degree, testing the moral qualification
of a candidate, before another degree is given. — Res. Grand
Steward's Lodge N. Y, 1851.

In South Carolina, the usage is to take but one ballot for
the three degrees. A special committee (1852) say: " We do
not consider it the right of a member to require a ballot
before conferring the second and third degrees, though it is
competent for the lodge to order a ballot; and if cause be
shown, it is perhaps the best practice to resort to the ballot.
We are of opinion, that as to the right of a member to call for
a ballot, and as to the effect of a ballot, if taken, there is a dif-
ference between the case of an entered apprentice applying
for the second degree, and a mere stranger applying to be
admitted to take the degrees

An unanimous ballot must be had in favor of the applicant
for each degree. — Const. Neb.

240 ADVANCEMENT — BALLOT OR VOTE OY,

Balloting on moral qualifications in advancement, in the
same body, is not a commendable practice, and is of doubtful
correctness. — C. W. Moore. The ballot should be on suitable
proficiency, and not on conduct since initiation. — G. M. Cal.t
1857.

A ballot should be taken prior to the conferring of each
degree. So we have been taught, believe, and teach. — C. F. C.
CaL, 1851.

By the Constitution and immemorial usages of our order,
an unanimous ballot for advancement is as necessary as for
initiation into the first degree. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

An unanimous ballot for each degree is required. — Reg. III.
Iowa, 1849.

Why should an applicant who, after zealous scrutiny, and
a month's delay, has been unanimously permitted to pass our
portals, be again, and yet again, subjected to the danger of
being stopped by a nameless objection from an unknown
source?— C. F. C. Min., 1858.

Permitting a lodge to have but one ballot for the three de-
grees, is not in strict conformity to ancient craft Masonry. —
C.F. C.ofD. C, 1856.

Conferring the second and third degrees, and admitting
members, without an unanimous ballot, we believe to be con-
trary to the landmarks, evidences, and charges of ancient Ma-
sonry.— Com. R. L, 1858.

The ballot for admission to each degree, as well as for
admission to membership, shall be unanimous, and every
member present shall vote. — Com. Juris., Ohio, 1857.

This Grand Lodge directs its subordinates to require a
separate and unanimous ballot for all candidates for initiation,
passing or raising, and for membership of brethren not made
in the lodge.— Res. R. I., 1858.

The vote upon application for initiation, advancement,
membership, or demits, must be by secret ballot, and one
negative shall reject. — Standard By-laws Ky., 1854.

ADVANCEMENT SUITABLE PROFICIENCY. 241

A clean ballot, on the application of a candidate foi initiation,
entitles him to receive the other degrees. — Reg. Wis., 1849.

It is undoubtedly true that the laws and usages of Masonry
have always required a ballot on each degree. — Parvin,
C. F. C. Iowa, 1850.

An unanimous ballot must be had for each degree, and for
membership.— Standard By-laws of Ark., 1857.

A ballot should be had on each degree, except in cases of
emergency. — Smith, G. M. Ark., 1856.

Although there is no law in the Ancient Constitutions
which, in express words, requires a ballot for candidates in
each degree ; yet the whole tenor and spirit of these Consti-
tutions seem to indicate that there should be recourse to such
a ballot, and the almost constant usage of the craft has been
in favor of such ballot, * * * Of course, then, the vote
should be unanimous. — Macket, P. M. L., 223.

In Massachusetts, in all the British lodges, in many of the
New York and other lodges, the practice is to take but one
ballot for the three degrees ; but we do not like its practical
results. The best way is to take a ballot for each degree. —
Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 187.

TVe think the general and correct practice is, to ballot for
each degree. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev., vi., 212.

In this state (Pennsylvania) the second and third degrees
are not balloted for. — Mir. and Key., 1857.

Applications for advancement in lodge where received
previous degree, requires no formality of written petition, or
laying over one month ; but if made in another jurisdiction,
it must be formally presented, in writing, and lay over ; and
be accompanied by recommendation of lodge first named. —
Hillyer, G. M. Miss., 1855.

Suitable Proficiency.
The masonic ritual, from which there is, or should be, no
appeal, requires that candidates for advancement should have
made " suitable proficiency in the preceding degrees," to enti-
11 >

242 ADVANCEMENT — SUITABLE PROFICIENCY.

tie them to such advancement. The proper and most consist,
ent method of testing the proficiency of such candidate, is by
examination in open lodge, under the direction of the Master
Examination in open lodge, and suitable proficiency in the
preceding degrees, are required by resolution, or regulation,
in the following jurisdictions: Arkansas, Missouri, Texas,
Louisiana, Alabama, Ohio, Minnesota, California, Iowa,
South Carolina, Florida, Michigan, Wisconsin, Canada,
Oregon, Virginia, Illinois, Tennessee, Kentucky and Indiana.

Before a subordinate lodge advances a candidate from one
degree to a higher degree, the Master of the lodge shall be
satisfied that the candidate has made suitable proficiency in
the preceding degree. — Res. N. Y., 1857.

Previous to advancement, all candidates shall be examined
in open lodge in the degree which they have taken, and be
found to possess at least a knowledge of that degree. (!) —
Const. Neb.

Every brother who desires to be raised to the sublime de-
gree of master mason, shall be examined before the lodge,
respecting the proficiency he has made in his former degrees.
* * *._ By-laws, 1796.

Creditable examination, in open lodge, should precede ad-
vancement.— Heard, G. M. Mass., 1857. Howard, G. M. Cat,
1857.

Satisfactory examination through the whole of the first sec-
tion of each degree must precede ballot for promotion. — Reg,
Tenn., 1857.

Every candidate shall be examined as to his proficiency in
the degree he last took, before he is advanced to a superior
degree. — Texas, 1843.

Advancement without regard to proficiency in the preced-
ing degree, is irregular, and an innovation of dangerous ten-
dency.— C. W. Moore, 1844.

The candidate shall be able to pass a satisfactory examina-
tion in open lodge in the preceding degree. — Const. England

ADVANCEMENT SUITABLE PROFICIENCY. 243

No candidate should receive the degree of F. C. 01 M. M.
without sufficient knowledge of the preceding degree to prove
himself as a mason of such degree, in the usual manner, un-
less in case of absolute emergency ; and a more hasty man-
ner is unmasonic and reprehensible. — Res. Me., 1854.

The conferring of a degree on a candidate before he has
made suitable proficiency in the preceding degrees, or at
least has been instructed in all of the lectures in the preced-
ing degree or degrees, is a fraud upon the candidate, and a
violation of the principles and constitutions of Masonry. —
Res. Mich., 1848.

This Grand Lodge fully deprecates and disapproves of
passing and raising candidates until they have first really
made suitable proficiency in the labor and principles of the
preceding degree, and the subordinate lodges are instructed
to work accordingly. — Res. Iowa, 1853.

No applicant for advancement shall be allowed to receive
the degree applied for until he shall be examined in open
lodge, and prove himself a proficient in the work and lectures
of the preceding degree. — Res. Oregon, 1857

The nominal, or " suitable proficiency," as it is called, de-
manded of candidates in the several stages of their advance-
ment, is not what is necessary in justice to them, and for the
interests and reputation of our order in this commonwealth
—Heard, G. M. Mass., 1857.

In all cases of advancement from one degree to another, it
shall be necessary for the brother wishing to be advanced, to
undergo an examination, in open lodge, in the degree from
which he prays to be advanced ; and such candidate shall be
examined in open lodge, and prove himself proficient, on the
first section at least, of the degree from which he prays to be
advanced. — Reg. Va., 1856.

That such as were to be admitted master masons, or mas-
ters of work, should be examined whether they be able of
cunning to serve their respective lords. — Reg. 1330.

244 .ADVANCEMENT — REJECTED APPLICANTS FOR.

No person shall be allowed to advance from the degree of
entered apprentice or fellow craft, without previous strict
and full examination, in open lodge, in all the work and lec-
tures of the degree or degrees which he has taken, and unless
he be found to be aptly informed and proficient in the same ;
and no lodge shall advance a brother who is found unable to
answer any considerable number of questions, or only super-
ficially acquainted with the work and lectures ; or when he
requires frequent prompting and suggestion of answers, to
enable him to pass an examination. — Res. Ark., 1853.

Bejected Applicants for Advancement.
The rejection of a petition for advancement does not, and
should not, imply masonic censure. It does not affect the
standing of the brother in the degrees he has already taken,
and, according to the most common usage, does not prevent
him from renewing his application at each subsequent stated
meeting after such rejection. We believe that, as a general
rule, the vote on advancement should have reference only to
the proficiency of the candidate in the preceding degree, and
that objections on moral grounds should take the form of spe-
cific charges, and a regular trial.

I do most unequivocally repudiate the doctrine, that a
lodge is doing right to deny advancement to an E. A., pro-
vided he shall not be impeached for, any offense committed
subsequent to his acceptance. I can find no principle of
ancient masonic law or justice to support such a position. —
G. M. of Me., 1848.

How long must an applicant, rejected for the second or
third degree, wait, before he may legally renew his application ?
Ans. This question, in most of the states, has been settled by
Grand Lodge edict. Twelve months is the period generally
allotted by local authority. — Morris.

The advancement of a candidate may be arrested at any
stage, for sufficient cause. — G. M. Ark., 1856.

Lodges are at liberty to entertain renewed applications for

ADVANCEMENT — REJECTED APPLICANTS FOR. 245

for advancement * even after rejection, without waiting twelve
months. The only injunction I have insisted on is, that the
renewed application should be made after regular notice, and
a month's delay.— Hillyer G. M. Miss., 1856.

We cannot admit that tne rejection of an application for
advancement implies masonic censure. Nor does it deprive
him of any privilege to which, as a mason, he was before en-
titled.—C. W. Moore, 1848.

Rejecting candidates in chapter or encampment does not
necessarily imply moral turpitude nor criminal delinquency.
— C. W. Moore.

There is no interdiction in the general usages or regula-
tions as to the time for re-application after rejection or ad-
vancement.— Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

A negative on the ballot for crafting or raising has the
same effect as on a petition for entering. Further promotion
can only be had on a new petition. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1854.
Com. Juris, do. Grand Lodge do.

There is no regulation of this Grand Lodge, or in the gen-
eral requirements of Masonry, forbidding the presentation of
a petition for advancement at every stated meeting, or the
lodge from entertaining it. — Anderson, G. M. 111., 1855. Grand
Lodge do.

A black ball on an application for advancement only affects
up to the next stated meeting. — Billings, G. 31. Wis., 1855.

A brother rejected for the second or third degree, may
renew his application at every subsequent meeting of the
lodge.— Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

We hold it to be a better rule, that the candidate for ad-
vancement has a right to apply at every regular meeting, and
that whenever any moral objection exists to his taking a
higher degree, it is better to present these objections in the
form of charges, and test their truth by an impartial trial. To

* Rejected applicants for initiation or membership, cannot re-apply within
twelve months after election, in the above State. — G. W. C

246 ADVANCEMENT — REJECTED APPLICANTS FOR.

this the candidate is undoubtedly entitled, on all the princi-
ples of justice. — Macket, 1857.

I do not believe that a candidate should be rejected on his
application for advancement, in consequence of objections to
his moral worth and character. — Mackey, P. M. L,, 227.

Rejecting an application for advancement is not necessa-
rily a stigma upon the character of an applicant ; nor is his
standing or rights at all affected. — Mackey, P. M. -L, 242.

Rejection of application for advancement does not affect
standing in the degrees already taken. — Morris, A. M. F. M.
ii. 14.

A brother's advancement may be stopped without any
apology, explanation, or confession of the act. — Morris, Am.
F. M., iv., 45.

One rejected for the second degree can make a new appli-
cation at any time thereafter, which may be referred and
acted on as though it were an original application. — C. Moore,
Mas. Rev., vi., 212.

A candidate for advancement should not be rejected for a
cause known to exist at the time of his original reception. —
C. Moore, Mas. Rev., x., 210.

The passing of the ballot upon the application of the can-
didate to be passed or raised, is a test of his moral qualifica-
tions ; and he may be stopped at any stage of his advance-
ment, by any member, and such member cannot be questioned
or called to account for his opposition. — Posey, G. M. Miss^
1854. This is sound masonic doctrine. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev^
xL, 305,

MEMBERSHIP

MEMBERSHIP A DUTY.

It is the duty of every brother to belong to some lodge,
»i^d bear his proportion of its labors and expenses ; unless
Ik> be unable, for good cause, to do so.

A lodge is a place where masons assemble and work.
Hence that assembly, or duly organized society of masons, is
called a lodge, and every brother ought to belong to one, and to
be eubject to its by-laws and the General Regulations. —
Ancient Charges 1720, iii.

No set or number 01 brethren shall withdraw or separate
themselves from the lodge in which they were made broth-
ers, oi were afterward admitted members, unless the lodge
becomes too numerous ; nor even then, without a dispensa-
tion fiom the Grand Master or his deputy. And when they
are thufe separated, they must either immediately join them-
selves to such other lodge as they shall like best, with the
unanimous consent of that other lodge to which they go, (as
above regiLaled,) or else they must obtain the Grand Mas-
ter's warrant to join in forming a new lodge. — Old Regula-
tions 1720, viii.

Every mason should belong to a regular lodge. — Const. Vt.

It is the duty of every mason to be a contributing member
of some lodge.— Consts. Min. and N. Y.

It is the duty of every mason to become a member of some
lodge, if there bo one in his county or corporation, unless
some controlling necessity prevent. — Res. Va., 1855.

Affiliation is a dvty of every mason. — Res. N. H., 1857.

When a man is ii tinted into Masonry, he promises to con-

248 MEMBERSHIP — A DUTY.

form to all the ancient established usages and customs of the
fraternity. For a mason to " belong to some regular lodge,"
is an "ancient established usage and custom of the frater-
nity, and every mason has promised to conform to that ancient
usage : is it consistent with ' good moral character ' to break
that promise ?" — Masonic Review.

A careful consideration of the Ancient Charges and the Old
Regulations compel me to acknowledge, that there is no ma-
sonic duty more explicitly announced in these authorities
than that which requires every mason to belong to a lodge.
— Mackey.

It is the duty of every mason to belong to some regular
lodge. — Res. Texas, 1854.

Every brother ought to belong to some lodge, and assist
the brethren in their work, and contribute to the funds of the
lodge.— Res. Ark., 1852.

That every mason ought to belong to some lodge, is unde-
niably true.— 0. W. Moore.

Every brother ought to belong to some lodge, and be sub-
ject to its by-laws, and the general regulations of the craft. —
Const. Eng.

It is contrary to, and inconsistent with, the ancient usages
and precepts of our order, to remain in the neighborhood of
a lodge without becoming a member thereof. — Res. Col., 1852.

Each mason should, as a masonic duty, attach himself as a
member to some lodge within whose jurisdiction he resides ;
but there is no compulsion in the matter. — Hubbard, Ohio,
1851.

It is improper for any regular mason to reside in the vicin-
ity of a lodge without being a member thereof, provided he
is able to pay lodge dues. — Res lnd., 1823.

The injunction that every brother ought to belong to some
lodge, is imperative. — Me., 1858.

Every brother ought to be a member of some lodge. — Mich.,,
1851. ,M.,1852.

MEMBERSHIP WHERE. 249

Ther3 is no power in any lodge to compel a brother to affil-
iate with it. He is not bound by his obligation to fraternize
in any particular organization. — Sherburne, G. M. Min., 1858.

The mason who demits from his lodge, and fails to associate
himself with another lodge as soon as practicable, violates
both the letter and the spirit of his obligations. — Smith,
Grand Orator of Iowa, 1849.

No mason can live outside the membership of the lodge,
without grossly violating his masonic obligations. — Morris,
Am. F. M., 1855.

Wnere.
A master mason can join any lodge that chooses to receive
him, no matter whether it be that nearest his place of
residence or not. It need not even be in the same state. A
candidate for the degrees must apply to the nearest lodge, but
having received them, he is not restricted as to the lodge to
which he shall apply for membership. As a general rule, a
brother ought to belong to the lodge in whose jurisdiction he
resides, but he is free to apply to any other, if he so chooses.
It is sufficient if he belong to some lodge, regardless of its
geographical location.

A master mason may become a member of any lodge, if the
lodge applied to shall see proper to receive him, within this
jurisdiction. — Res. Mich., 1848.

Every brother petitioning for affiliation must acknowledge
the authority of the nearest lodge. — Morris, Am. F. M. iii.,
129.

A master mason is not restricted in his privilege of appli-
cation for membership within any geographical limits. He
has the right of applying for membership to any lodge thai
he may select. — Mackey, P. M. L., 250.

We know of no law in Masonry, which would make a
brother a member of any particular lodge. He has a right to
select for himself, without necessary reference to distance. —
Lawrence, Sig. and Jour., 1856.
11*

250 MEMBERSHIP — WHO ARE ELIGIBLE TO.

A knight residing within the jurisdiction of one encamp-
ment, may lawfully become a member of another. — Hubbard,
G. G. Enc, 1856.

Who are Eligible to.

Only those who have been raised to the degree of master
mason, are now eligible to membership in a subordinate or
Grand Lodge.

No brother shall be admitted a member of any subordinate
lodge under this jurisdiction, until he has been raised to the
sublime degree of master mason. — Consts. N. H. and N. J.

None but master masons can be members of a lodge, or
vote upon any subject. — Const. Vt.

The lodges shall admit as members such only as are mas-
ter masons. — Const. Mass.

Initiation makes a man a mason ; but he must receive the
master mason's degree, and sign the by-laws, before he be-
comes a member of the lodge. — Const. N. Y.

None but master masons, of good standing, against whom
no other lodge has claims, can be admitted to membership in
any lodge. — Const. N. C.

None but master masons are recognized as members of a
lodge. — Const. Fla.

No brother, unless he be a master mason, can be a member
of a lodge. — Const. B. C.

No one can become a member of a lodge, or be entitled to
vote therein, until he has received the third degree in
Masonry. — Consts. Ohio and Indiana.

The lodges shall admit as members such only as are master
masons. — Const. Wis.

None but master masons, and who have signed the by-laws,
can be members of a subordinate lodge- Const. Min.

Nearly every Grand Lodge in the country has decided, that
entered apprentices and fellow crafts are not eligible for
membership in lodges. It is, therefore, a settled question

MEMBERSHIP — WHO ARE ELIGIBLE TO. 251

This, however, has not always been the practice. Under the
present system, membership appertains only to Masters'
lodges. The practice in this country we believe to be uni
form and correct. — C. W. Moore, 1852.

Every lodge must receive as a member, without further
proposition or ballot, any brother initiated therein; provided
he express his wish to that effect on the day of his initiation,
as no lodge should introduce into Masonry a person whom
the brethren might consider unfit to be a member of their
own lodge. — Consts. Ca., Eng., and Ga.

No brother, except he be a master mason, can be a member
of a lodge. — Const. Md.

Voted, That the Corresponding Grand Secretary write to the
officers of lodge, respecting the impropriety of admit-
ting a fellow craft to membership. — Mass., 1801.

That entered apprentices were, by ancient usage, members
of lodges, is undeniable. Now the practice is nearly, if not
quite general, not to regard a brother as a member of
a lodge until he has been raised, and has signed the by-
laws of the lodge. We think this is wrong. — Lawrence,
C. F. C. Ga., 1856. We fully concur.— Abell, C. F. C. Cal,
1858.

None but master masons are entitled to membership, ma-
sonic burial, or the general charity-fund of the lodge. — Hub-
BARr, Ohio, 1851.

The masonic law in this state is, that no one can be a mem-
ber of a lodge unless he be a master mason. — C. F. C. of R. I.,
1858.

Entered apprentices and fellow crafts are not members of
lodges, and cannot be until they are raised to the Master's
degree.— Parvin, C. F. C. Iowa, 1849.

At present an entered apprentice is not considered a mem-
ber of the lodge, which privilege is only extended to master
masons. This was not formerly the case. — Mackey. P. M. L.,
239

252 MEMBERSHIP — HOW ADMITTED TO.

How Admitted to.
The oldest written rule upon the subject is contained in the
General Regulations of 1720, and required a unanimous vote
to admit to membership in a lodge. This is yet the univer-
sal rule in the admission of those who received the degrees
in some other lodge; but we believe that the majority of
American lodges receive to membership those whom they
themselves initiate, without the formality of a vote. The con-
sent to confer the degrees includes consent to become a
member, and the brother affiliating is simply required to sign
the by-laws of the lodge, to complete his membership. This
is, in substance, the English rule, and the one that seems to
us most consistent and masonically just. If the regulations
of the Grand Lodge, and the by-laws of the subordinate lodge,
are silent upon the point, an unanimous vote is necessary, in
all cases, to admit to membership. In the latter case, the bal-
lot must be taken in the same manner as for initiation ; and
if the brother received his degrees in any other lodge, he
must apply by written petition, which should take the same
course as a petition for initiation. Such petition should be
accompanied by a certificate of demit from the lodge of which
the brother was last a member, or a certificate showing that
he has regularly received the degrees, as the case may be.

No man can be entered a brother in any particular lodge,
or admitted to be a member thereof, without the unanimous
consent of all the members of that lodge then present when
the candidate is proposed, and their consent is formally asked
by the Master. — Gen. Reg. 1720, Art. vi.

The admission of members is a matter of local regulation.
A lodge may require an unanimous vote, (where no constitu-
tional provision exists,) or only a majority ; or, in respect to
its own initiates, no vote at all, but simply that the brother
sign the by-laws. — C. W. MooitE, 1850.

Every lodge must receive as a member without further
proposition or ballot, any brother initiated therein, provided
euch brother express his wish to that effect on the day of hi*

MEMBERSHIP — HOW ADMITTED TO. 253

initiation, as no lodge should introduce into Masonry a per-
son whom the brethren might consider unfit to be a member
of their own lodge. — Consts. Ca., Eng., and Ga.

A brother about to be passed or raised must, if not already
a member of the lodge, be, previous to the ceremonial, affili-
ated as a member in the degree preceding that to be confer-
red.— Const. Scot.

Receiving the degrees does not constitute the person a
member of the lodge, ipso facto. Signing the by-laws is
necessary. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

The conferring of the degrees upon a man does not, under
the ordinary laws of Masonry, confer upon him a membership
with any particular lodge. — Sherburne, G. M. Min., 1856.

A member having demitted from a lodge, even for the
shortest space of time, cannot be affiliated again, save by pe-
tition and ballot.— Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

This Grand Lodge requires of all its subordinates a sep-
arate and unanimous ballot for membership of brethren not
made in the lodge. — Res. R. I., 1858.

The conferring of the first degrees in masonry upon a man
does not, under the ordinary laws of Masonry, confer upon
him a membership with any particular lodge. It is optional
with him, after he has received his degrees, to become a
member of a lodge or otherwise ; and it is also optional with
the lodge to receive him or not. He is not bound by his ob-
ligation to fraternize in any particular organization, and no
masonic lodge is bound to admit him into their fold.— G. M.
ofMin.,1856.

Every brother, when he receives the degree of master
mason, shall have his name enrolled among the members of
the lodge which confers the degree, as a member thereof. —
Const. Md.

Initiation makes a man a mason ; but he must receive the
master mason's degree, and sign the by-laws, before he be-
comes a membe r of the lodge. — Const. N. Y.

254 MEMBERSHIP HOW ADMITTED TO.

Has a lodge a right to initiate, pass, and raise a man, and
then deny him the privilege of membership ? Ans. It has not
It is horrid injustice. It should not be allowed. — Morris.

The vote for membership shall be by secret ballot, and one
negative shall reject. — Standard By-laws Ky., 1854.

Does conferring the degrees make the member ? Ans. Ac-
cording to the general American practice, it does. Some
lodges, however, only recognize membership by signature to
the by-laws. The foreign practice, is we believe, to require
a special vote, even after the candidate has taken his degrees,
before his membership is secured. — Morris.

In 1855, the Grand Lodge of Connecticut adopted a resolu-
tion declaring, that no mason shall be admitted to membership
without an unanimous vote of the lodge, which vote shall be
taken in the same manner as in balloting for a candidate for
initiation.

We join with our Missouri brethren in heartily condemning
the practice of initiating candidates who are not acceptable
to the lodge as members. — Perkins, C. F. C. La., 1856.

The whole spirit and tenor of the General Regulations, as
well as the uniform usage of the craft, sustain the doctrine,
that when a mason is initiated in a lodge, he has the right, by
signing the by-laws, to become a member without the ne-
cessity of submitting to another ballot. — Mackey, P. M. L.,
248.

It may be considered as settled law, so far as the General
Regulations can settle a law of Masonry, that a master mason
can only be admitted a member of a lodge when applying by
petition, after a month's probation, after due inquiry into his
character, and after an unanimous ballot in his favor. —
Mackey, P. M. L., 254.

A brother, formerly belonging in another jurisdiction, ap-
plied for membership, but produced no certificate from the
lodge of which he was a member. Objection was made.
The Master decided that tke production of a demit was un-
necessary. A committee ti Grand Lodge say : " Though a

MEMBERSHIP — REJECTED APPLICANTS FOR. 255

certificate would be often the most satisfactory evidence, and
every brother on denritting should procure one, yet it has
not been, and should not be, an inflexible rule. It is competent
for the lodges to receive and decide on other masonic tests
and evidences." — Texas, 1856.

There is but one way of receiving a candidate, whether for
initiation or membership, and that is by secret ballot. — J. W.
S. Mitchell, 1855.

One who has not signed the by-laws, cannot be considered
a member. — Lawrence, Sig. and Jour., 1856.

Rejected Applicants for.

The rejection of a petition for membership does not affect
the standing of the brother so rejected. He may immediately
apply to any other lodge, if he pleases. His general rights
and privileges are in no wise disturbed, even with respect to
the lodge which rejected his petition. When an application
for membership is rejected, all moneys and papers accompa-
nying the petition, should be returned to the applicant. They
are his own private property, and cannot be lawfully retained
from him.

The demit of a rejected applicant for membership should
be returned to him, if such accompanied his petition. It is
his own property. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 49. Hartsock,
G. M. Iowa, 1858.

Rejection of an application for membership does not affect
the standing of the applicant. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 14.

A mason, having been rejected on his application for affili-
ation, is not thereby debarred from subsequently making a
similar application to any other lodge. — Mackey, P. M. L.,
283.

The mere refusal to re-admit a mason to membership does
not inhibit him the rights and privileges to which he is enti-
tled as a mason. — Res. Ala., 1848.

Thn C. F. C. of D. C, 1850, concur in the above resolution.

The rejection of an application for affiliation does not affect

256 MEMBERSHIP — DOUBLE.

the good standing of the applicant, or deprive him of any of
his masonic rights or privileges. — Res. La., L854.

The rejection of a petition for membership does not, in any
manner, affect the standing of a brother as a mason. — C. W.
Moore, 1849.

The rejection of an application for membership involves no
censure of the applicant. — Rice, D. G. M. Ga., 1855

The rejection of an applicant for membership does not
affect his good standing. — Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

Double Membership.

Formerly, a brother could be a member of as many lodges
as chose to receive him ; but present custom is opposed to the
practice of holding membership in more than one lodge. It
may be considered as well settled, that a brother cannot be a
member of more than one lodge at the same time.

A brother may, however, be an honorary member of as
many different lodges as choose so to accept him.

No brother shall be a member of more than one lodge, nor
shall he hold more than one office in the same lodge, at the
same time. — Consts. Me. and Mass.

We hold that no mason can be a member of more than one
lodge, at the same time. — Haswell, Vt., 1851.

Ordered, That every brother do conform to the law made
at the Quarterly Communication, held February 19th, 1723:
" That no brother belong to more than one lodge within the
bills of mortality."— G. L. Eng., 1741.

No brother shall be a member of more than one subordi-
nate lodge, at the same time. — Consts. N. H. and Ca.

A brother cannot be a member of more than one lodge, at
the same time. — Const. Vt. Ditto N. J. Anderson, G. M. of
111., 1855. Grand Lodge do.

No mason shall be a member of more than one lodge under
the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, at the same time. — Const.
R.I.

No mason can be in full membership in more than on©

MEMBERSHIP — DOUBLE. 257

lodge at the same time ; but this does not extend to honorary
membership. — Canst. N. Y.

No mason can bo a member of more than one lodge at the
same time. — Consts. Mich, and JV. C.

No brother shall be a member of two lodges, at the same
time, within three miles of each other, without a dispensation
from the Grand Master, or the presiding Grand officer. —
Const. S. C.

No brother shall be a member of more than one lodge, nor
shall he hold more than one office in the same lodge, or in
Grand Lodge, at the same time. — Const. Wis.

Any brother may be a member of as many lodges as may
choose to admit him. — Va. Text Book.

No lodge shall admit to membership any brother who is
already a member of a lodge under the jurisdiction of this
Grand Lodge. — Const. Md.

We hold that no mason can be a member of more than one
lodge, at the same time. — Haswell, C. F. C. Vt., 1851.

Resolved, That it is the opinion of this Grand Lodge, that
any member of a subordinate lodge under another jurisdic-
tion may become, by affiliation, a member of a subordinate
lodge under this jurisdiction, provided he be in good stand-
ing in his original lodge, and pays his dues regularly to both.
—Cal. 1853.

Our reading has taught us that there is no impropriety in
a mason's holding membership in two lodges at the same
time, and such we believe to be the current opinion in the
United States, where the subject has been investigated. —
King, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1854.

The views of your committee are in accordance upon this
point with those of New York and Maryland, and are fully
sustained by Brother John Dove, in his Masonic Text Book :
any brother may be a member of as many lodges as choose to
admit him.— Douglass, C. F. C. Fla., 1855.

It is the opinion of this Grand Lodge, that a master mason

258 MEMBERSHIP — DOUBLE.

can be a member of two lodges at one and the same time. —
Res. Texas.

I know of no special regulation of this Grand Lodge, nor
any law of Masonry acknowledged by us as binding, which
forbids membership in two lodges at the same time. * * *
I see but little good, and much harm, as the probable result
of double membership. — Perkins, G. M. La., 1856. *

No brother shall be a member of more than one lodge at
the same time.— Const. N. Y., 1822. Const. Mo., 1846. Const.
Mass., 1792.

No brother shall belong to more than one lodge within the
bills of mortality .*— Const. 1723.

The regulations and the usage are both against the practice
of holding membership in more than one lodge at the same
time. We regard the prohibition as wise and conservative.
— C. W. Moore, 1846.

It is a well-settled rule, that a mason cannot be a member
of two lodges at one and the same time. — C. Moore, and Ohio,
1848.

Where several signers of a petition for a dispensation did
not withdraw their membership from their old lodge, (not a
recommending lodge,) and continued in the new lodge for
years after it was chartered, held, that they were liable for
dues in both lodges. — Hillyer, G. M. Miss., 1855.

It is an old rule of the order, that no one can be a member
of two chartered lodges at the same time. They may be
connected with a lodge working under dispensation, and
hold their membership in the chartered lodge. — Hubbard,
Ohio, 1853.

We have never been able to find any ancient law or reg-
ulation to the contrary. — Storer, C. F. C. Conn., 1855.

We are clearly of opinion that no mason should be a mem-
ber of two lodges at the same time. — Com. Work, La., 1856.

* I, e., within the city of London. — G. W. C,

MEMBERSHIP — HONORARY. 259

It is very certain that no one can be a member of two lodges.
— Com. Unfin. Bus., do.

No mason can be a member of more than one lodge at the
same time. — Mich. 1855.

Before reading anything upon the subject, we very natu-
rally supposed a brother could not belong to more than one
lodge at the same time ; but, after reading a good deal, we
have waded among conflicting opinions into a state of doubt.
—C. F. C. Min., 1857.

It is highly improper, if not unmasonic, for a brother to
unite himself with two lodges at the same time. — Iowa, 1845.

It is certain that a brother cannot be a member of two
lodges at the same time. — Iowa, 1848.

No brother can be a member of two chartered lodges at the
same time. — Swigert, G. 31. Ky., 1858.

Where no local law exists in a particular jurisdiction, I
know of no principle of masonic jurisprudence which forbids
a mason to affiliate himself with more than one lodge. —
Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 284.

The general usage in this country is, that a mason cannot
be a voting member in more than one lodge at the same time.
Morris, Am. F. M., iv., 11.

A mason can hold a membership in but one lodge at a time,
unless it be a mere honorary membership. — C. Moore, Mas.
Reo. v., 247.

Active membership cannot be held in more than one lodge
at the same time. — Heard, Mass., 1856.

Honorary Membership.
There are two classes of honorary members. The first in-
cludes those cases where brethren residing in foreign places
are, in compliment to their distinguished character or abil-
ities, made honorary members ; and the second class includes
those who are made honorary members of the lodge to which
they are already affiliated.

260 MEMBERSHIP HONORARY.

The first is entirely complimentary, and confers no other
privileges than those of visiting the lodge at pleasure ; of
occupying a seat in the east ; and of participating with the
members in their social enjoyments, and in their private lodge
meetings, on more equal terms than an ordinary visitor.

In the second case, the favor is usually bestowed upon
aged and faithful brethren, as a reward for long and faithful
services. In this case it exempts them from the payment of
all dues or assessments, and from all obligation to unite in the
labors of the lodge, but deprives them of no privilege which
they before enjoyed as a member. They are still eligible for
office, and may serve on committees, and vote on all questions
as heretofore. In either case, honorary members are exempt
from the payment of dues or assessments.

Although the practice of having honorary members is con-
tinued by some Grand Lodges, as New York and Massachu-
setts, it is strongly objected to, and we think justly, by
others, as an innovation and a practice incompatible with
Masonry.— C. F. C. of R. L, 1850.

Resolved, That in the opinion of the Grand Stewards' Lodge,
honorary members, in subordinate lodges, should be proposed
and balloted for in the same manner as constitutional mem-
bers, and cannot be elected by show of hands or majority
vote.— N. T., 1854.

To become an honorary member of a lodge, requires a pre-
vious application of one month, and a ballot. Honorary
members are not entitled to vote or to hold office. The same
person may be an honorary member of several lodges.—
Lewis, G. M. of N. Y., 1858.

Brethren of eminence and ability^ who have rendered ser-
vice to the craft, may, by a vote of the Grand Lodge, duly
confirmed, be constituted members of the Grand Lodge, with
such rank and distinction as may be thought proper. — Const.
Eng.

An honorary member has no vote in the lodge on any sub-
ject.— Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 77.

MEMBERSHIP — WITHDRAWAL, OR DEMITTING FROM. 261

An honorary member cannot be chosen into office, speak,
vote, or otherwise concern himself with the business of the
lodge.— Calcott's Disq., (1769,) 212.

I do not believe it strictly proper to make any one an hon-
orary member. — J. W. S. Mitchell, 1855.

Honorary membership, carrying with it no right to vote on
the financial or other business concerns of a lodge — it being
of a complimentary character merely — can be conferred on a
brother by any number of lodges. — Heard, Mass., 1856.

"Withdrawal, or D emitting from.

Membership being a duty of every brother, it follows that it
should not be dissolved, or withdrawn, without good and
sufficient reasons. The old rule was, that a brother could not
withdraw from his lodge, except for the purpose of joining
another, or to assist in the formation of a new one. It is to
be regretted that any other exception has ever been allowed.
It seems now to be the general usage, that any brother in
good standing, and whose dues are paid, has a right to with-
draw his membership at any time, even without giving his
reasons therefor. We are not prepared to admit the justice
of such rule, and believe that a member should be required to
give his reasons, in writing, for such request, and that his
membership should not cease without consent of the party
whose consent was necessary for its commencement, i. e., the
lodge. Such is the rule in our own lodge, and is the only
one that seems to us to be consistent. A brother under
charges cannot withdraw his membership during the pen-
dency of such charges : nor can he do so if he is in arrears
for dues.

A membership once commenced, does not terminate, except
by death, expulsion, demit, (withdrawal,) or forfeiture. The
latter is regulated by the by-laws, and is the penalty usually
inflicted for non-payment of dues. Absence, for any length
of time, or removal from the jurisdiction, do not, of them-
selves, work a forfeiture of membership ; though it is perhaps

262 MEMBERSHIP — WITHDRAWAL, OR DEMITTING FROM.

within the power of a lodge to declare otherwise by a reg-
ular by-law.

The vote of the lodge demits, though no certificate of such
vote be issued. A demit having been voted, neither the
Master or Secretary can refuse to deliver the brother a cer-
tificate of the same, if he requests it. A vote to demit cannot
consistently be reconsidered. A majority vote is sufficient
to grant a demit.

No set or number of brethren shall withdraw or separate
themselves from the lodge in which they were made, or
were afterward admitted members, unless the lodge becomes
too numerous ; nor even then without a dispensation from the
Grand Master or Deputy; and when thus separated, they
must either immediately join themselves to such other lodges
as they shall like best, or else obtain the Grand Master's war-
rant to join in forming a new lodge, to be regularly consti-
tuted in due time.— Old Reg. 1723, Art. 6.

Resolved, That in all applications for demits, the lodges
within our jurisdiction be governed by the ancient usages
and charges of our institution, and suffer no member to with-
draw, unless to form a new lodge or to join another. — Me.,
1858.

In the opinion of this Grand Lodge, it is contrary to, and
inconsistent with, the ancient usages and precepts of our
order, to withdraw from a subordinate lodge, without some
good cause. — Res. 111., 1850.

This Grand Lodge does not recognize the right of a mason
to demit or separate himself from the lodge in which he was
made, or may afterward be admitted, except for the purpose
of joining another lodge, or when he may be about to remove
without the jurisdiction of the lodge of which he is a mem-
ber.—Ties. Texas, 1853.

No mason ought to demit from a lodge unless it be to affil-
iate with another lodge, to assist in the formation of a new
lodge, or remove into another jurisdiction. — Res. La., 185-

It is not in accordance with the Ancient Regulations, or

MEMBERSHIP — WITHDRAWAL, OR DEMITTING FROM. 263

the spirit of Masonry, that a brother should withdraw his
membership from the lodge to which he is attached, except
for the purpose of joining some other lodge, or for the rea-
son that he is about to remove from the jurisdiction of the
lodge.— Fla., 1856.

No lodge under this jurisdiction shall grant a demit to any
of its members, except for the purpose of becoming a mem-
ber of some other lodge ; and no brother shall be considered
as having withdrawn from one lodge, until he has actually
become a member of another. — Res. Conn., 1853.

Hereafter no demit shall be granted by any lodge within
this masonic jurisdiction, unless upon the personal application
of the member, when in the jurisdiction; or upon his written
one, when absent therefrom; and in no case, when there
exists an untried imputation upon the character of the appli-
cant for a violation of the criminal laws of the land. — Res.
D. C, 1856.

It is evident, from all the information which we could
reach, that the withdrawal from a lodge is unmasonic, and was
never known in the ancient vocabulary of the order. — Macon,
C.F. C.ofN. C, 1855.

In the opinion of this Grand Lodge, it is inconsistent with
the ancient usages and precepts of our order, to withdraw
from a lodge without good cause. — Res. Cal., 1852.

It is contrary to, and inconsistent with, the ancient usages
and precepts of the order, to withdraw from a subordinate
lodge without some good cause: — Reg. III., 1842.

The doctrine that a member can adhere as long as he
pleases, and then demit, and hold on to the rights and priv-
ileges, and be excused from the duties, is an innovation as
inconsistent with ancient charges, or landmarks, as it is with
right and justice. The ancient rule unquestionably is, that
members should not demit except when leaving the jurisdic-
tion, or when the lodge becomes too numerous, for the pur-
pose of joining another.— Bierce, C. F. C. Ohio, 1856.

No brother shall demit from any lodge under this jurisdic-

c64 MEMBERSHIP — WITHDRAWAL, OR DEMITTING FROM.

tion, except it be for the purpose of traveling out of the ju-
risdiction of said lodge, or of joining another lodge. — Res.
Mo., 1855. Or to assist in the formation of a new lodge. —
lb., 1858.

No member can withdraw from his lodge until his dues
are paid or remitted ; and then only in case of his removal to
another jurisdiction, or for the purpose of joining another
lodge.— C. F. C. of D. C, 1855.

The Grand Lodge of Iowa (1855) condemned a subordinate
lodge for granting demits without showing upon the record
that it was for the purpose of joining some other lodge.

We are greatly to blame in not having held to the doctrine,
and taught all initiates that they had no right of withdrawal.
— John Dove, Mas. Rev., xiv., 119.

Not proper to withdraw from a lodge without sufficient
cause, though the right is an inherent one. — Mich., 1851.

A brother in good standing, and not indebted to the lodge,
is entitled to a demit. — Miss., 1853.

Nor shall any member be permitted to withdraw from his
lodge until all his dues to the same are paid or remitted. —
Mich., 1855.

A lodge has no power to inquire into the objects and mo-
tives of a brother demitting. — Wis., 1853.

Any brother may demit from his lodge, if in good standing,
on tender of his dues, and no action on the part of the lodge
is required to perfect his demission. — Wis., 1854.

Every mason, whether E. A., F. C, or M. M., has a right to
withdraw from a subordinate lodge at any time he may see
proper, provided his dues to said lodge are paid, and there
are no charges preferred against him before the lodge.— -
Tenn., 1850.

We hold, a member of a lodge has a right to demit when
he pleases, having paid all dues, if there are no charges pre-
ferred against him ; and that he has a right to apply again for
admittance, but cannot be admitted to membership without a
ballot.— Brown, Com. Fla., 1854.

MEMBERSHIP — WITHDRAWAL, OR DEMITTING FROM. 265

There is no power in a lodge to prevent a brother dissolv-
ing his connection with it, when he chooses to do so ; and
there can be no doubt that when a brother demands a dis-
charge from his membership, the strongest reasons exist in
favor of granting it, — Sherburne, G. M. Min., 1856.

We do not believe a Grand Lodge has the power to com-
pel a brother to unite with any lodge ; and when he has united,
it has no power to prevent him from demitting, if he be in
good standing Parvin, C. F. C. Iowa, 1848.

The right to withdraw is inalienable and indefeasible. —
Smith, G. M. Ark., 1856.

The doctrine and practice in Georgia is, that any member
in good standing, who has paid np his dues, is entitled to a
demit. — Ed. Sig. and Jour., 1855.

In 1854, Rockwell, D. G. M. of Georgia, decided that any
member in good standing, who has paid up his dues, is enti-
tled to a demit. Mackey (South Carolina, 1855) considers
this to be in strict accordance with the uniform usage of his
Grand Lodge.

Any member in good standing, and not under charges, may
be permitted to demit, upon giving written notice to the
lodge of his intention, if his arrears are paid up in full. —
Standard By-laws S. C, 1856.

If a brother chooses to withdraw from his lodge, he ought
to be free to do so. — Res. Ark., 1852.

The Grand Lodges of Wisconsin and Mississippi, (1854,)
allow a demit as a matter of right to a brother in good stand-
ing, who has paid his dues. The C. F. 0. of Indiana (1855)
think it should require a majority or unanimous vote.

Every brother in good standing at the time, and for good
reasons, has the right to withdraw from the lodge. — C. F. C.
Texas, 1848.

Your committee are inclined to subscribe to the opinion,
that every member has the right to demit without giving any
reason ; and, when requested, it is the duty of the lodge to
grant the request.— C. F. C. of N. H., 1858."
12

266 MEMBERSHIP — WITHDRAWAL, OR DEMITTING FROM.

There is no law requiring a brother to file his reasons with
his petition for a demit ; and it is not given to the lodge to
judge of the validity of his reasons. No one is compelled to
work in a particular lodge. — Mellen, C. F. C. Miss., 1856.

Every member is entitled to retire from his lodge on
making regular application. — Const. Ire.

In all cases where the dues are paid, and the member's
standing is fair, it is customary and justifiable for the lodge
to grant the applicant a fair dismissal. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

I cannot deny to any man the right of withdrawing when-
soever he pleases, from a voluntary association. The laws
of the land would not sustain us in the enforcement of such
a regulation, and our own self-respect should prevent us from
attempting it. — Mackey.

The taking a demit does not sever the membership of the
brother receiving it, unless he remove from the jurisdiction
of the lodge ; but such demit is in the nature of a letter, com-
mendatory of the brother to whom it is issued, for his admis-
sion to another lodge ; nor does it disqualify him from hold-
ing office in the lodge granting it. — Com. 3Ias. Juris., Ohio,
1857.

An entered apprentice or fellow craft has the same priv-
ilege to demit from the lodge as a master mason. — Morris,
Am. F. M., ii., 51.

A demit is like a permit granted by many of the European
states to their subjects to leave the country. After the per-
mit is granted, if they continue to reside in the country of
their birth, their allegiance continues. The permit does not
denationalize them while they remain in its jurisdiction, but
takes effect only on their leaving that jurisdiction, and be-
coming citizens of another. — Bierce, Ohio, 1854. It cannot,
strictly speaking, be given to a fellow craft. — lb.

A demit is only a document to enable its possessor to pe-
tition another lodge for membership, and prove that he owes
ncthing and is not under charges. — Morris, Am F. M. v., 92.

MEMBERSHIP — WITHDRAWAL, OR DEMITTING FROM. 267

If the lodge order a demit, that order is the demit; no
matter whether it be taken out or not. — Morris, Am. F. M^
iii., 65.

The privilege of taking out a demit when moving into
another jurisdiction, is inherent in masons of every degrea —
Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 169.

A demit requires the action of the lodge itself. No officer
or officers can grant it. — Morris, Am. F. M., iv., 28.

The mere written form of the demit is not the action of the
lodge, but the memorandum of that action. A failure to fur-
nish it does not render void their action in granting it, neither
does the failing of the demitted to accept this evidence of his
demission, keep him in the lodge. He is demitted as soon
as he asks for a demit, and the lodge grants it. For failure
to furnish him his evidence, he has redress through the Grand
Lodge or Grand Master ; a refusal to take his evidence is his
own loss. — Com. Juris. Iowa, 1856.

"Where a brother wished to " withdraw entirely from Ma-
sonry," the Grand Master of Alabama (Wood, 1857) decided,
that a demit was the only means of withdrawal known to our
institution. McCorkle, (C. F. C. Kentucky, 1857,) Adams,
(C. F. C. Louisiana, 1858,) and Prescott, (C. F. C. Minnesota,
1858,) held that the views of the Grand Master were correct.
The decision was a wise one. — English, C. F. C. Ark., 1857.

A lodge has no right to retain from a brother a demit ob-
tained from the lodge to which he was last affiliated, on any
pretense whatever. — Lawrence, Sig. and Jour., 1858. The
Master has no right to withhold a demit from a member, who
has paid his dues, and is square on the Secretary's book. — lb.

A vote taken to demit a brother is final, and he is, to all in-
tents and purposes, lawfully demitted. — Hartsock, G. M. Iowa,
1859.

The Grand Lodge has no power to grant a brother a demit
from his lodge. — Mo., 1857.

The action of the lodge constitutes the demit, and the cer-

268 MEMBERSHIP — WITHDRAWAL, OR DEMITTING FROM.

tificate of the Secretary only furnishes the evidence of that
action. — Ind., 1856.

An entered apprentice cannot demit. Only a master mason
can demit. — III., 1856.

Masonry does not assume the authority to hold its mem-
bers or votaries in affiliation, when such affiliation interferes
with their duties to their God, or with the peace of their fam-
ilies; and such interference is good cause for a mason to
withdraw from a lodge by demit. — Res. HI., 1857.

A member of a demised lodge may be admitted to member-
bership in a working lodge while the lodge to which he be-
longed remains dormant, provided he has complied with the
regulation of the Grand Lodge, in such case made and pro-
vided. But he cannot be received in membership with
another working lodge, after the resuscitation of the dormant
lodge, unless he obtains a regular demit from said lodge. —
Res. N. J., 1857.

A demit is simply a dismissal from membership. It is no
further a certificate of masonic character, than that there are
no charges against him, and none ready to be preferred, and
that he is clear of the books. — Miss., 1853.

A masonic demit dates from the lodge record when the
same was granted, and, consequently, membership ceases with
said date. — Reg. 111. Sandford, G. M. Iowa, 1857.

By the usages of Masonry, an entered apprentice is not en-
titled to a demit. He may, however, receive a certificate that
he was initiated in a particular lodge, and that his character
is good.— Hall, G. M. Texas, 1858.

If a member asks for a demit, which is voted him, but of
which he does not avail himself, he is still a member. — Hub*
bard, Ohio, 1852.

A lodge may revoke a demit, even if the brother to whom
it is granted has removed out of the jurisdiction of the lodge.
.— !&.,1853.

After once joining a lodge, a mason is always to be consid-

MEMBERSHIP REMOVAL DOES NOT FORFEIT. 269

ered a member until he receives a demit, or imtil death; ex-
cept in case of his being one of the petitioners for a new lodge,
which will release him from his membership. — Morris.

A lodge has no right to demit a member while accused of
a heinous offense. A demit certifies that the person has paid
all dues, and withdraws in good standing. — Morris.

A brother cannot demit while under charges. — J. W. S.
Mitchell, 1856.

No member is entitled to a demit, unless at the time of de-
manding it he be in good standing, and free from all charges,
either for crime or for dues. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 287.

Removal does not Forfeit.
Removal from the jurisdiction, does not, of itself, forfeit or
suspend a brother's membership in his lodge. Neither does
absence for any period, of itself, work such forfeiture or sus-
pension; unless the by-laws require the actual presence of
each member within certain stated intervals ; in which case
the local regulation governs, in place of general usage.

Twenty years absence would not forfeit membership, with-
out some regulation to the contrary. — C. W. Moore. Regula-
tion making continuous absence for a specified time operate
as forfeiture of membership, without notice, is good. — lb.

The removal of a brother into another jurisdiction does
not, of itself, authorize his name to be stricken from the roll
of the lodge of which he is a member. — C ousts. Mass. and Me.

Mere removal, or change of residence, does not forfeit or
destroy the membership of a brother ; but it ceases only by
demitting, expulsion, or death. — C. F. C. of R. L, 1850.

The removal of a Warden without this jurisdiction, does
not affect his right to representation in the Grand Lodge, so
long as he remains a member of the Grand Lodge, by virtue
of being a Warden of a subordinate lodge under this jurisdic-
tion.— Res. Cal., 1852.

A mere removal, or change of residence, does not forfeit or

270 MEMBERSHIP — REMOVAL DOES NOT FORFEIT.

suspend the membership of a brother. — Parvin, C. F. C.
Iowa, 1849.

The allegiance of a member to his lodge is indefeasible. A
removal from the geographical jurisdiction will not release
the member from the personal jurisdiction of his lod^e —
Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 336.

A removal out of the jurisdiction does not disqualify a duly
elected and installed officer from service.— Morris, Am, F. Mn

iv.f a

THE BALLOT

THE RIGHT OF BALLOT.

To ballot upon the application of every candidate for the
degrees or for membership, is the sacred and inviolable right
of every member of a lodge " then present when the candidate
is proposed, and their consent is formally asked by the Mas-
ter."—Gen. Reg. 1720, vi.

The right of a brother to vote is inviolate. — Miss., 1853.

It is the mason's great prerogative. It is a right which
every member enjoys, and which he is bound to exercise
faithfully, impartially, and conscientiously. With him alone
rests the responsibility of its use. — Randall, G. M. Mass.,
1853.

The brother who deposited the negative ballot, did so in
the exercise of a lawful and constitutional right. He was in
the discharge of the most important and responsible duty
that could devolve upon him as a member of the lodge. —
C. W. Moore, F. M., xi., 22G.

The only safe rule is, to respect the right of private ballot.
Let that right be sacred, and leave the proper exercise of it
to the conscience of every brother. It may occasionally be
abused ; but as a rule, it is sound conservative, and masonic.
-J6., 227.

A. mason has the inherent right to deposit his negative on
the application of a person for initiation in his lodge, as well
as on an application for membership. Of this right no ma-
sonic power can deprive him. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev., iii., 202.

This ballot (for candidates) is the sacred right of individual
masons. No Grand body should even meddle with it, and it

272 THE BALLOT — DUTY TO BALLOT.

is doubtful whether they have the right to do so. — B. B
French, A. Q. R. F., i., 320.

In balloting for candidates for initiating, passing, or raising
every master mason who is a member of a lodge under the
jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, shall be entitled to a vote.
* * *. — Const Texas.

It is a right which every member enjoys. — Randall, G. M.
Mass., 1854.

This is an inherent privilege, not subject to dispensation,
or interference of Grand Lodge. — Maceey.

The right to ballot is one of the highest and most responsi-
ble privileges of membership. — C. W. Moore.

None but members of the lodge have a right to ballot. —
Wis., 1855.

Every member of the lodge present at balloting for a can-
didate, has a right to deposit his vote. — Mackey, P. M. L.,
196.

Duty to Ballot
It is not only the right, but the duty of every member of a
lodge to ballot on each application for initiation, or for mem-
bership, if present when such ballot is taken.

Every member present shall ballot on the application, un-
less excused by the lodge. — Consts. Mass. and Wis.

All the members present shall be required to vote. — Const.
La.

In balloting for a candidate for initiation, every member is
expected to vote. No one can be excused from sharing the
responsibility of admission or rejection, except by the unani-
mous consent of the lodge. Where a member has himself no
personal or acquired knowledge of the qualifications of the
candidate, he is bound to give implicit faith to the recom-
mendation of his brethren of the reporting committee, who,
he has no right to suppose, would make a favorable report on
the petition of an unworthy applicant. — Mackey, Lexicon, 52«

THE BALLOT — WHO CAN BALLOT. 273

One of these duties is the balloting for candidates for ini-
tiation.—C. W. Moore, 1844.

As a general rule, a member is not, and ought not to be,
allowed to throw upon others the responsibility of admitting
or rejecting a candidate. — lb., 1848.

A proper, impartial, and unprejudiced exercise of the right
to ballot, is one of the most sacred duties with which a mem-
ber can be intrusted. — C. W. Moore.

A lodge cannot excuse any member from voting on a peti-
tion, because the unanimous consent of all is required to enti-
tle the candidate to admission. — J. W. S. Mitchell, 1855.

Who Can Ballot.
Only those who are members of the particular lodge to
which the candidate makes application, and who are then
present when the ballot is taken, have the privilege of ballot-
ing upon such application.

Entered Apprentices and Fellow Crafts. — The present,
and nearly universal usage, is, that entered apprentices and
fellow crafts cannot ballot upon an application for initiation.
It is, however, a modern usage, and its expediency and jus-
tice may well be doubted. By the ancient law and usage, an
entered apprentice* was not only allowed to recommend an
applicant for initiation, but allowed to ballot, even for Grand
Master.— See Gen. Reg. 1720.

No mason under the degree of Master is entitled to a vote
in a subordinate lodge. — Res. Ohio, 1823.

Entered apprentices and fellow crafts are not members of
lodges, nor are they entitled to the franchises of members. —
Washington Convention, 1842.

Entered apprentices and fellow crafts have, rightfully, no
voice in receiving or rejecting material or workmen. Lodges
are under the charge of master masons only. C. F. C. La^
1854.

• Bee <; Charge at initiation."

12*

274 THE BALLOT — WHO CAN BALLOT.

Admit and carry out the principle, (allow E. A. and F. C. to
ballot,) and it will overturn our fabric, and bury our ancient
principles beneath its ruins. — Bieece, C. F. C. Ohio, 1855.

No ballot should be had in an E. A. lodge for the initiation
of candidates, and if any be taken, the act is void. An E. A.
or F. C. has no right to vote. All balloting should be, in a
Master's lodge, opened in the third degree. None but mas-
ter masons are members ; none under the third degree have
any right to vote. — Hubbard, G. M. Ohio, 1851.

All the proceedings, ballotings, and business of the lodge,
except that of conferring the subordinate degrees, shall be
had and done in a lodge of master masons. — Const,. G. T..
Oregon, 1851, 10. Ditto. Const G. L. CaL, 1856.

(See also authorities bearing upon this point under the
head of " Business.")

Nor shall any ballot be taken for either of the three de-
grees, except in a master mason's lodge. — Const. Conn.

None but master masons, being members of the lodge, can
propose or recommend* a candidate for the honors of Ma-
sonry, or vote for their admission, passing or raising ; or vote
for the admission of members. — Const. N. J.

No lodge can, consistently with the principles of Masonry,
permit an E. A. or F. C. to vote. — Reg. Miss.

The doctrine that an entered apprentice or fellow craft
should be allowed to vote upon the initiation of a candidate,
we believe to be an innovation upon the body of Masonry. —
C.F.C.ofR. J., 1858.

A proposition to allow entered apprentices and fellow
crafts to ballot on applications for initiation, was laid on the
table by the Grand Lodge of Iowa in 1855.

There is no sound reason for giving to entered apprentices
and fellow crafts the privilege of voting. — Mokris, Am. F. M.,
ii., 95.

* See "Charge at teutiatton into the first degree." — G. W. C

THE BALLOT — WHO CAN BALLOT. 275

Neither an apprentice or fellow craft should exercise tho
privilege of voting.— Ed. Lon. Mas. Q. R., 1838, 286.

Resolved, That by initiation, an entered apprentice becomes
a member of the lodge of entered apprentices in which he
has been initiated ; that by being passed, a fellow craft be-
comes a member of the lodge of fellow craft masons in which
he has passed, and each is liable for dues; and, consequently,
each has a right to vote upon the question of admitting
another person to receive the same degree which he has
taken ; and, accordingly, that the ballot for initiation must be
taken in the entered apprentice degree, and that for the
second degree, in the fellow craft degree, in order that that
right may be exercised. — Ark., 1854. [Repealed 1857.]

If there must be a separate ballot for each degree, where
should that ballot be taken ? Why not in an entered appren-
tice lodge for the first degree, and in a fellow crafts' lodge for
the second ?— C. F. C. Mm., 1858.

Brother G. H. Gray, Senior, (Mississippi,) takes the ground
that entered apprentices and fellow crafts are entitled to the
privileges of membership; to participate in the general
business of the lodge ; and to ballot for candidates for their
respective degrees. — Vide Am. F. M., iii., 10.

A ballot shall be taken in each degree. — Const. Wis., 1854,

Apprentices and fellow crafts have no right to vote on any
subject, except the admission and advancement of candidates.
—Const. Ky., 1853, p. 17.

Entered apprentices and fellow crafts are entitled to vote
in receiving or rejecting an applicant, either as a brother or
member ; but in no other case can they vote. — Ky., 1804.

The Committee on Foreign Correspondence of Iowa, (Wal-
lace,) 1855, argues : that an E. A. is a mason, and recognized
as such the world over ; that he has the right, according to
all the manuals, from Preston down to the present time, to
recommend persons to become masons ; (see E. A. charge ;)
and therefore, he ought to have the privilege of balloting on
the <*dmissioi )f candidates into the order.

276 THE BALLOT — WHO MAY BALLOT.

The Committee on Foreign Correspondence of Missouri, for
1856, take similar ground.

Brother Albert Pike, from Committee on Foreign Corres-
pondence of Arkansas, 1854, says: "We take the "broad
ground that an E. A. is a mason ; and that, as a mason, he is
a member of the lodge, and has an inalienable right to vote
on the question of admission of any candidate to the degree
which he has taken.

Apprentices and fellow crafts have no right to vote on any
subject, except the admission and advancement of candidates.
— Const. Ky.

After having duly considered the subject to them referred,
the committee are of opinion, that entered apprentices and
fellow crafts ought to be permitted to ballot for the admission
of a candidate to the first degree in Masonry ; and that this
has been the ancient practice of masons, so far as they have
been able to ascertain it; and that it is proper and expe-
dient to continue the same practice. — Com. Conn., 1807.
[Report accepted and approved.]

Who May Ballot.
Visitors. — Only members of the lodge, " then present when
the candidate is proposed, and their consent is formally asked
by the master," have a right to participate in the ballot.

Visitors are not permitted to ballot, though it is probable
that previous to the organization of lodges by charter, they
were allowed to do so.

Visiting brethren have no right to vote on the admission
of candidates for initiation. If a visitor knows any reason
why an applicant should not be admitted, it is his duty to
communicate it to the Master of the lodge, that the objection
may be properly investigated, and this is all that he has
occasion to do. — C. W. Moore, F. M., vii., p. 199.

But no man can be entered a brother in any particular
lodge, or admitted to be a member thereof, without the unani-
mous coi sent of all the members of that lodge then present

THE BALLOT — WHO MAY BALLOT. 277

when the candidate is proposed, and their consent is formally
asked by the Master. — Gen. Reg. IT 21.

No mason should be permitted to vote in a lodge unless he is
a member. — Com. Iowa, 1848.

To allow a visiting brother to ballot is essentially wrong in
principle, and should be discontinued in practice. — Com. 111.,
1845.

Visiting brethren have no right to vote on the admission
of candidates for initiation. Such a claim is inadmissible. —
C. W. Moore, 1848.

A visiting brother has the right, and it is his duty, to make
known any good and sufficient reason why the candidate
should not be received ; the granting of a further privilege
would, in the opinion of your committee, be productive of
evil results. — Parvin, G. M. Iowa, 1847.

On balloting for candidates for initiating, passing, or rais-
ing, every master mason who is a member of a lodge under
the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, shall be entitled to a
vote. * * *. — Const. Texas.

Visitors ought not to be invited to vote. — Com. Juris. G. G.
Enc, 1856. Decidedly unmasonic to allow visitors to vote. —
Morris, Am. F. M., iv., 91.

No mason, of any degree, has a right to vote on any sub-
ject agitated in a lodge, unless he be a member of such lodge.
— Res. Ohio, 1827. Your committee unhesitatingly express
the opinion, that the above provision is only declaratory of
the rights of a lodge. It is not, in its terms, imperative ; and
does not prevent a lodge from extending to a visitor the
courtesy of permitting him to vote on the admission of candi-
dates; and if this be the case, one lodge has the right to
agree with another to permit the members of one to vote
upon the admission of candidates in the lodge of the other. —
Com. Ohio., 1854. [Adopted.]

We are opposed to granting visiting brethren the right to
ballot on the admission of candidates. — Parvin, C. F. C.
Iowa, 1847.

278 THE BALLOT — WHO MAY BALLOT.

No mason should be permitted to vote in a lodge unless he
be a member. — Iowa, 1848.

The doctrine that any other than members should vote
upon the initiation of a candidate, we believe to be an inno-
vation upon the body of Masonry. — C. F. C. of R. I., 1858.

It is contrary to masonic regulation to suffer any mason to
vote, except the members of the lodge where application is
made. — Res. Ala., 1848.

We cannot agree in the propriety of giving such an unlim-
ited veto power to all men who may become possessed of
masonic knowledge. — C. F. C. of N. K, 1857.

We are not sure but the principle is correct. — C. Moore,
Mas. Rev., xix., 116.

I would recommend that you sanction the right of all
Knights Templar present to ballot upon the application of a
companion to receive the orders. The conferring of the
order upon a companion constitutes him a member of the
whole society of Knights Templar, and that whole society, if
present, ought to have the right of receiving or rejecting the
applicant. This was the olden usage, consistent with the
creation and spread of the order, and which I hope to see
restored.— Hubbard, G. M., to G. E. U. S., 1856, p. 17.

We also concur in the opinion, that all regular knights
present at a ballot for the admission of a companion, ought to
be allowed to participate therein. — Morris, ib., p. 46.

We have ourselves thought that good might grow out of a
regulation allowing all visiting brethren to vote on initiations,
but it is probable that a greater current of evil might also
flow from the same source. — Mellen, C. F. C. Miss., 1856.

It is, therefore, right and proper that all masons whose
standing is sufficiently good to warrant their presence in the
lodge, should be entitled to vote on the admission of a candi-
date for brotherhood. — Com. Ohio, 1857.

Any master mason residing under the jurisdiction of this
Grand lodge, and a member of some subordinate lodge, shall

THE BALLOT — MODE OF BALLOTING. 279

be allowed to vote for the initiating, passing, or raising of any
candidate in any subordinate lodge under said jurisdiction. —
Res. Wis.

To the above resolution, the Committee on Foreign Corres-
pondence of Rhode Island, for 1850, say: "We cannot, there-
fore, but deprecate such a course, and hope that it will be
abandoned.

On visiting the lodge at , I found that its by-laws

extended to all visiting brethren the privilege of voting upon
applications for the degrees. This being unusual, my first
impression was that it was illegal ; but upon reflection, and
looking to the landmarks, I find nothing to condemn it ; and
there are some considerations which would commend it as a
general regulation. — Barber, G. M. Ark., 1854.

The Connecticut Committee on Foreign Correspondence,
(Storer,) for 1855, in noticing the above, and its attendant
argument, admits that it " contains suggestions worthy of con-
sideration."

The following resolution is now (1858) pending in the
Grand Lodge of the District of Columbia : Resolved, That in
balloting for a candidate for initiation, any brother present,
who is in good standing, whether he be a member of the
lodge or not, so that he be a member of some one of the
lodges in this jurisdiction, shall have the right to vote.

Mode of Balloting.

Any mode may be adopted in taking a ballot which allows
each one of the members present perfect freedom in the choice
of his ballot, and inviolable secrecy in depositing it.

The almost universal usage, from time immemorial, has
sanctioned the use of black and white balls as the proper
mode of obtaining the opinion of the members. The use of
cubes in place of black balls seems to be fast becoming general
in American lodges, on the score of simplicity, certainty, and
dispatch. This mode of balloting is, perhaps, as free from
objection as any yet adopted. The manner in which the bak

280 THE BALLOT— FREEDOM OP.

lots shall be collected from the members, is, in the absence
oi special enactments or regulations, left to the choice of the
several lodges. The Old Regulations simply require that the
consent of the members be "formally asked by the Master;
and they are to signify their assent or dissent in their own
prudent way, either virtually or in form, but with unanimity."

Freedom of the Ballot.
It is a well-settled principle in masonic law, that every
brother should be allowed perfect freedom in the choice of
his ballot. He cannot be dictated to, or in any way influ-
enced, or called to account for the vote he may give. It is
his sacred right, for the abuse of which he is only account-
able to his conscience, and his God.

No one is to be held accountable to the lodge for the vote
he may give. — Hubbard, G. M. Ohio, 1851.

Each master mason, and none other, must vote upon his
own responsibility, and is not to be called on for any reasons
for his so voting. — lb., 108.

The wrongful exercise of the right of balloting, on the appli-
cation of a candidate, is not, in itself, a sufficient ground for
suspension or expulsion. — lb. 110.

A member may cast a black ball at any ballot, without
assigning any reason for so doing ; neither have the lodge, or
Master, any right to ask, or even try to ascertain who cast
it.— Smith, G. M. Ark., 1856.

No mason can be called to an account for the vote which
he has deposited. The very secrecy of the ballot is intended
to secure the independence and irresponsibility to the lodge
of the voter.— Mackey, P. M. L., p. 193.

Even if a member voluntarily should divulge the nature of
his vote, and of his motives, it is still exceedingly question-
able whether the lodge should take any notice of the act, be-
cause by so doing the independence of the ballot might be
impaired. — lb.

It is the mason's great prerogative. It is a right which

THE BALLOT — FREEDOM OF. 281

every member enjoys, and which he is bound to exercise
faithfully, impartially, and conscientiously. With him alone
rests the responsibility of its use. — Randall, G. M. Mass.,
1854.

No restriction of any sort shall be placed upon a brother
in the matter of voting, nor shall he be questioned how or
why he exercised that right. — Standard By-laws, Me., 1857.

In order to promote harmony, and preserve privacy in bal-
loting, it is ordered, that the Wardens stand facing the table,
at such a convenient distance from ths balloting box as to
cover the balloting brother from the inspection of any other,
until all the members have balloted. And it is further
ordered, that every member keep his seat until his balloting
brother is returned, and that no one be influenced by another
not balloting. Every member is required to ballot. And
whoever influences another as to his balloting, shall be ex-
cluded from being a member. — By-law q/"1739.

No number of masons have the right to demand that an-
other shall vote to admit a particular man. The right to vote
as one pleases, to refuse to extend Masonry to a particular
man, or class of men, or people, is the highest and most sacred
of the masonic rights of conscience, with which no one has a
right to intermeddle. — Storer, C. F. C. Conn., 1855.

A member has a legal right to cast his ballot for or against
an applicant for initiation or membership ; and however well
convinced one brother may be that an applicant is every way
worthy of being received, if the applicant is rejected, he is
bound to presume that the brother casting the negative bal-
lot is equally convinced that the candidate is unworthy. —
Hogin, G. M. la., 1855.

The right to vote on the admission of candidates, is one
of the highest privileges of membership, and ought always
to be exercised independently and impartially — without fear
and without undue favor. — C. W. Moore, 1850.

In voting, every brother has the undoubted right to vote
as he may see fit, and cannot be required to give his reasons
iherefor.— C. F. C. Ind., 1851.

THE BALLOT — FREEDOM OF.

A Master has not the right to suspend the ballot, after it
has been ordered by the lodge, or to refuse to declare the re-
sult when ascertained. He may order a second ballot, to test
the correctness of the first ; but the ballot having been taken,
the result must be declared, and entered on the record. —
C. W. Moore.

It is the duty of the Master to declare, or cause to be de-
clared, the rejection of the candidate, whenever the result is
clearly ascertained. He has no power to refuse. — G. M. Ill,
1856.

No subordinate lodge, nor the Grand Lodge, can inquire
into the cause of the rejection of a candidate for initiation. —
Ga., 1854. This is law.— C. F. C. Ky., 1855.

No one can question a brother's right to vote a black ball,
or impugn his motives, or inquire into his reasons. — Miss,,
1855.

No restriction of any sort shall be placed upon a brother in
the matter of voting, nor shall he be questioned how or why
he exercised that right. — Standard By-laws of Ky., 1854.

The right of ballot is secured to every member ; none can
restrain him in the exercise of it ; none can question his right
to exercise it. If he sees proper to give a negative vote, no
power can interfere. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev., 1849.

Every member of the lodge has the right to vote, and may
vote as it pleases him ; and he cannot and must not be ques-
tioned or called to account for his vote, on any pretext, or
under any circumstances. — Posey, G. M. Miss., 1854. Hart-
sock, G. M. Iowa, 1857.

Every member is responsible to his own conscience alona
for the reasons governing his vote on admissions. — Res. Tenn.,
1857.

No right to ask who cast a black ball. A lodge cannot re
ject the negative of a member when voluntarily declared.
His disclosure is not a self-disfranchisement. — Gedge. G. M.
La., 1852.

THE BALLOT — FREEDOM OP. 283

The right of balloting is, among masons, considered a
sacred right. And that their vote may be free and unbiased,
no one is to be held accountable for the vote he may give.
The lodge has no right to inquire as to who gives the black
ball.— Ohio, 1851.

The right of balloting should be held and regarded as a
sacred right ; but if any member can be found to willfully
conspire to injure or destroy the lodge, or mar its peace and
harmony, such should be counseled ; and, if need be, tried for
unmasonic conduct, and suspended or expelled. — Hubbard,
Ohio, 1853.

This Grand Lodge does not possess the power to revise
the decisions of a subordinate lodge in the rejection of appli-
cants for initiation, or for membership. — lnd., 1857.

The Master cannot refuse to declare the result of a ballot.
Anderson, G. M. ML, 1855. Grand Lodge do.

A brother cannot be charged for rejecting an applicant. —
Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

In case of a negative ballot, no question shall be asked
except by the "Master, and that only, whether there has been
any mistake. — By-laws 1766.

A member may cast a black ball at any ballot, without as-
signing any reason for so doing ; neither has the Master or
the lodge any right to ask, or even try to ascertain who cast
it.— Smith, G. M. Ark., 1856.

The right to cast a black ball is unquestionable. — Ains-
worth, G. M. Oregon, 1856.

There is no law in the whole jurisprudence of the institu-
tion clearer than this : that neither the Grand Lodge nor the
Grand Master can interfere with the decision of the ballot
box.— Mackey, P. M. L., 208.

The lodge cannot demand a brother's reasons for his vote.
Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 14.

A member has neither a legal nor moral right to avail him-
self of his position to prejudice the character of any man, nor

284 THE BALLOT — SECRECY OF.

to gratify his personal animosity, whether the object of his
dislike be the petitioner or the lodge. When he departs
from the rule of justice, he grossly abuses his privileges, be-
comes a dangerous member of the lodge, lays himself open
to discipline, and, the fact being proved, to expulsion. Every
lodge possesses ample power to protect itself, as well against
an unruly and troublesome member, as against the violation
of any of its laws. It matters not that there is no special
provision in its by-laws to meet a particular case, the common
law of Masonry is ample for the purpose. The law of self-
preservation is above either. — C. W. Moore.

Secrecy of the Ballot.

Another vital point connected with the ballot is, that it
must be a secret ballot. No one has a right to know how
another has or will cast his ballot. The vote of each must
be the secret of each, and no one can lawfully penetrate or
divulge that secret.

This ballot is, and is to be, secret. A mason has a right to
cast a ballot, winch shall reject the application of a candidate ;
but, moreover, he is entitled to do this in a manner that shall
be a profound secret to all his brethren. — G. M. Mass., 1853.

We hold the secrecy of the ballot unquestionable, and
admit of no call for reasons. It is scandalous to give a man
such a right as that of the secret ballot, and then, because h«
does not use it in accordance with the views of others than
himself, to put his judgment on trial, and subject its inde-
pendence and freedom to your own different views, by de-
manding his reasons. — F. M. King, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1853.

Any brother who shall violate the secrecy of the ballot by
stating how he voted on any question, or by endeavoring to
ascertain how a brother voted ; or, if he should be aware, and
mention it to another brother, shall render himself liable to
severe masonic censure ; and, for a second offense, to expul-
sion.— Const. Canada.

No member can be required to divulge his vote on ballot-
ing for a candidate for the degrees of Masonry, or for mem-

THE BALLOT — SECRECY OF. 285

berBhip, nor to assign reasons for his vote, if known. — Cal.,
1851.

The Ballot. — This is strictly secret ; it is inviolable ; it is
without question, except on the ground of an unintentional
or suspected mistake. — Hatch, C. F. C. of N. r.,1851.

It is masonically unlawful for any brother to give informa-
tion how he casts his ballot. — B. B. French, A. Q. R. F., i.f
320.

The ballot for candidates or for membership is strictly and
inviolably secret. — Consts. N. Y. and Min.

Nor shall any lodge require any of its members to give his
or their reasons for voting against any person who may apply
for initiation or membership therein. — Const. Ala.

Nor shall any attempt be made, in any manner, to discover
the brother who shall have cast a negative ballot. — Const. La.

It is not competent for the Master of a lodge, or for the
lodge itself, to demand of a member his reasons for voting
against a candidate for the degrees or for membership. —
C. F. C. Cat, 1851.

No member of a lodge shall be required to divulge his vote
on balloting for a candidate for the degrees in Masonry, or
for membership, nor to assign reasons for his vote, if known.
—Res. Col., 1851.

A ballot must be secret, without question, and unanimous.
—C.F. C. of N.H., 1852.

The right to a free, unquestioned, secret ballot, in all ques-
tions of fraternization, is the dear and inalienable privilege of
every member of a lodge. — Com. Juris. 111., 1853.

The ballot is sacred ; no brother should seek to know how
another votes; and if he does know, he has no right to com-
municate it. It is wrong for one to make known his own
ballot.— G. M. of La., 1855.

No brother, of his own accord, should ever make known
how he has cast his ballot, unless it be a negative one, and

286 THE BALLOT — SECRECY OP.

for which he desires to assign the cause to his loslge. No
brother should institute any means to ascertain how another
voted ; and if the knowledge be accidentally imparted to him,
le should keep the information within his own bosom. —
G.M.qfD. C, 1355.

It is unmasonic for a member to declare whether he intends
to cast a white or black ball, or at any time thereafter to
make known to any one how he voted, or to endeavor to as-
certain how another member intends to vote or has voted, or
to disclose the fact, should it come to his knowledge ; and all
who do so shall be subjected to masonic discipline. — Res.
D. C. 1856.

Though there is no by-law of this Grand Lodge against the
exposure of a ballot, yet it is a gross violation of the usages
of Masonry.— Res. Mo., 1856.

Kespecting the right of a presiding officer or member of a
lodge to demand the reasons that may influence a member in
the exercise of the privilege of balloting, your committee are
fully decided that no such right exists ; and that any measures
expressly taken on the part of a lodge, with a view to force
or extort from a member thereof such reasons, or even to as-
certain the fact respecting any ballot that may be given, can
be viewed in no other light than as deviations from ancient
usages and privileges. Notwithstanding the foregoing, your
committee are equally decided that there is no constitutional
objection to such development by any member of a lodge,
when and where it is voluntarily made, either in open lodge,
to the presiding officer personally, or to a committee specially
appointed for the purpose. — Com. Me., 1822.

I believe an objecting party should give his reasons for so
doing.— G. M. of Me., 1848.

A member arises in his place, and publicly avows that he
objects to the candidate, and if the ballots are passed, he shall
vote against his admission. He is inquired of for his reasons,
but declines giving any. Can his lodge deal with him for
this, or in any legitimate way interfere to prevent the carry-
ing out of his avowed intentions? On this state of facts, I

THE BALLOT — SECREC* OP. 287

advised, that the member was exercising an undoubted
masonic right, for which he could not be questioned or inter-
fered with. It seems to be generally admitted that no
brother can masonically be called upon to give a reason for
casting a negative "ballot, or in any way explain why he so
exercised his rights ; and this case appeared to me to stand
on the same ground as if the member had cast a negative bal-
lot, and publicly avowed it to the lodge. — Tucker, G. M. Tt.
1851.

Resolved, That no secular lodge has the right to interfere
with the right of private ballot, when exercised by one of its
members ; that if a brother chooses to avow his hostility to a
petition, and does not disclose his reasons therefor, he stands
in the same position as if he had cast a black ball, and his
reasons cannot be demanded by his lodge ; nor can they, in any
way, deal with him for so doing. Should he voluntarily state
his reasons, then he makes them the property of the lodge,
who, in that case only, have the right to judge of their
masonic validity. — Res. Vt., 1851.

It is unmasonic for any member of a lodge to inform
another how he balloted on any petition or question, to seek
to know how another has balloted, or to communicate such
knowledge, if possessed ; the secrecy of the ballot being
obligatory upon all. — Res. La,, 1855.

The ballot is, and is to be, strictly secret. It is the mason's
great prerogative ; * * * but, moreover, he is entitled to
do this in a manner that shall be a profound secret to all
his brethren. — Randall, G. M. Mass., 1854.

Has a member a right to say how he will vote, or how he
has voted ? Ans. He has not. He may state his objections,
but may not violate the sanctity of the ballot box. If it is
right for one to state how he voted, it is right to inquire how
the others voted. — Morris.

A brother cannot be required to state his reasons for a
vote. This would destroy the secrecy of the ballot, or make
it a mere farce. The way in which a member votes is his own

288 THE BALLOT — SECRECY OP.

secret, and he cannot be required to divulge it. The lodge
has no control over the ballot of a member, nor is it at lib-
erty to pry into the question, for the purpose of ascertaining
how any member has voted. — C. W. Moore, F. Mag., xv., 44.

Neither have the lodge or Master any right to ask, or even
to try to ascertain who cast it. The ballot should be secret
— G. M. of Ark., 1856.

No one shall inspect the ballot, save the Master or Ward-
ens; and no brother shall be permitted to make known to
another, or to the lodge, what manner of vote he cast. —
Standard By-laws Me., 1857.

Not only has the brother the right to a secret ballot, but no
one has a right to inquire how he balloted. A brother cannot be
called to account by any one in regard to his ballot. It is a
secret between himself and his God. No lodge and no mem-
ber of a lodge have the right to pry into the secret. If a
brother casts a black ball, he is supposed to do it conscien-
tiously, and with a realizing sense of his moral accountability.
His reasons are his secret, unless he chooses to divulge them to
a brother, or his lodge. In this latter case, they may judge
of their weight ; but if he chooses to keep them a secret, no
one may seek to penetrate that secret. — Chase, Mas. Jour.,
1857.

We hold the secrecy of the ballot unquestionable, and
admit of no call for reasons. — Hatch, C. jP. C. of N. Y, 1850.

The practice of gathering the opinions of members, by dis-
cussion, before the ballot, and of demanding reasons of the
objection after the ballot, deserve to be severely reprehended,
as a violation not only of the Constitution, but of the ancient
landmarks. — King, Spec. Com. of N. Y., 1856.

In 1856, the Grand Lodge of Indiana decided, that it had
no power to inquire into the motives of the members of sub-
ordinate lodges in casting the ballots for or against the
admission of members.

The Masters of subordinate lodges are particularly in-
structed to preserve, with the utmost care, the secrecy of the

THE BALLOT — SECRECY OF. 289

ballot, and to prevent an exposure of the ballots of the mem-
bers.— Res. Miss., 1856.

Each member's right to ballot is sacred, and to be exercised
in absolute secrecy. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

In the secrecy of the ballot is the only hope of Masonry. —
Bikrce, C. F. C. Ohio, 1855.

If any brother shall willfully disclose his ballot on a petition
for initiation, or advancement, or seek to ascertain how others
voted, it shall be the imperative duty of the Master to arraign
him before the lodge, for unmasonic conduct, and if found
guilty, he shall be disciplined. — Reg. bid., 1854.

A brother should not be questioned as to his motives for
rejecting an application for advancement, if he choose not to ,
reveal them. — G. M. Cat., 1857.

It should be cause for discipline for any brother intention-
ally to expose his own ballot, or that of any other member. —
Biebgb, C. F. C. Ohio, 1856. We fully endorse the sentiments
of the Ohio committee.— McCorkle, C. F. C. Ky., 1857.

Xo brother shall reveal his ballot to another. — By-laws
1766.

If any brother willfully disclose his ballot on a petition for
initiation or advancement, or seek to ascertain how others
voted, it shall be the imperative duty of the Master to arraign
him for unmasonic conduct, and if found guilty, he shall be
disciplined. — Res. Iowa, 1855.

We hold it to be highly improper for any mason to say
how he voted upon a rejected petition. — Fuller, C. F. C.
Tenn., 1858.

No member shall divulge the vote given by a member on
any petition. — Reg. Ark.

The secrecy of the ballot should be inviolate. — Mackey.

The Master should not permit a member to divulge the

color of, or the reasons for, his vote. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 14.

No mason has a right to inform his lodge how he voted

in any matter that has been decided by ballot. — lb., 147.

290 THE BALLOT — MUST BE UNANEHOUS;

No member has a right to know how another voted. — Ib.t
iv., 36.

The secrecy of the ballot must be preserved inviolate. —
Posey, G. M. Miss., 1854.

The ballot is sacred, and no one has a right to know how
another votes, nor require his reasons for voting as he does.
— C. Moore, Mas. Rev., xv., 318.

No brother should seek to know how his brother voted,
and even if he learn it, he should not, and has no right to
communicate his knowledge to others. — Lawrence, Sig. and
Jour., 1856.

Must be Unanimous.
The general rule that governs the order in the admission
of candidates and members, is, that such admission must be
sanctioned by entire unanimity.

But no man can be entered a brother in any particular
lodge, or admitted to be a member thereof, without the unani-
mous consent of all the members of that lodge then present
when the candidate is proposed, and their consent is formally
asked by the Master ; and they are to signify their consent
or dissent in their own prudent way, either virtually or in
form, but with unanimity. Nor is this inherent privilege
subject to a dispensation ; because the members of a particu-
lar lodge are the best judges of it ; and if a fractious member
should be imposed on them, it might spoil their harmony, or
hinder their freedom ; or even break and disperse the lodge ;
which ought to be avoided by all good and true brethren. — .
Old Reg. 1721, vi.

In subsequent editions of the Ancient Constitutions, the
following is added to the above regulation. By what right
the Grand Masters dispensed with unanimity, we are not
informed.— G. W. 0

" But it was found inconvenient to insist upon unanimity
in several cases. And, therefore, the Grand Masters have
allowed the lodges to admit a member, if not above three

THE BALLOT — MUST BE UNANIMOUS. 291

ballots are against him ; though some lodges desire no sucb
allowance."

No candidate shall be initiated in any lodge under this ju-
risdiction, without a clear and unanimous ballot in his favor.
— Consts. Me. and Mass.

No candidate for initiation shall be accepted without the
unanimous ballot of the members present. — Const. R. I.

None shall be admitted but by unanimous ballot. — Const.
Conn.

A candidate can only be accepted by the scrutiny of a
secret ballot, and an unanimous vote. — Const. N. Y.

The candidate is balloted for on a stated night of meeting,
and receiving an unanimous vote, is declared to be approved.
— Const. Penn.

On balloting for a candidate, one black ball shall reject
without a question, except that a second ballot may be
demanded to be satisfied of no mistake. — Const. N. C.

* * * It is competent for a minority, or any member of
the lodge, prior to the final admission to membership, to ar-
rest the candidate, for good cause shown. — Const. Fla.

No lodge shall initiate a candidate, or confer either of the
other two degrees, or admit a member, without the unanimous
consent of the members present. — Const. D. C.

No person shall be initiated, passed, raised, or admitted a
member, in any lodge, without the unanimous consent of the
members present. — Const. Ala.

Which ballot must be unanimous in his favor, or the peti-
tioner declared rejected. — Const. La.

An unanimous vote must be had in favor of the applicant
for each degree. — Consts. Ohio and Indiana.

No candidate shall be initiated in any lodge under this ju-
risdiction without a clear and unanimous ballot in his favor.
—Const. Wis.

No master mason shall be admitted a member of any lodge

292 the ballot — must be unanimous.

under this jurisdiction, without an unanimous vote in his
favor. — lb.

A candidate can only be accepted by an unanimous vote. — .
Const. Min,

An unanimous ballot is required in Illinois and Kentucky.
— G. W. C.

No applicant for initiation or membership, in any lodge,
shall be received, except by the unanimous consent of all the
members present. — Consts. Mo. and Kansas.

If unanimous in his favor, the petition shall be granted. —
Const. Texas.

No person can be made a mason in, or admitted a member
of, a lodge, if on the ballot two black balls appear against him.
Some lodges wish for no such indulgence, but require the
unanimous consent of the members present ; the by-laws of
each lodge must, therefore, guide them in this respect ; but
if there be two black balls, such person cannot, on any pre-
tense, be admitted. — Const. Ca.

The admission of every candidate for the honors of Ma-
sonry, should be upon an unanimous ballot in his favor ; and
one negative persisted in, is sufficient to exclude him. — Res.
N. H., 1849.

A ballot must be secret, without question, and unanimous.
— C. F. C. of N.H., 1852.

Nor shall any degree be conferred on a candidate, nor any
brother be admitted a member of any lodge under this juris-
diction, without a previous unanimous ballot in his favor. —
Reg. Me., 1822.

No lodge shall initiate a candidate without the unanimous
consent of the members present. — Const. Md.

No person shall be made a mason unless all the brethren
present are unanimous, and if but one member be against him,
he shall be rejected. No brother shall be admitted as mem-
oer of this lodge unless all the members present are unani-
mous as aforesaid. — By-law of 1133.

THE BALLOT — RECONSIDERATION OP. 293

In Ireland, in admitting members, each ledge is at liberty to
prescribe by its by-laws whether an unanimous or a majority
vote shall be requisite ; but if no such by-law of the lodge ex-
ists, the Grand Lodge rule, which requires unanimity, applies.

No lodge shall initiate, pass, or raise any applicant, unless
the vote be unanimous in his favor. — Const. Miss.

No person can be made a mason or admitted a member, if
three black balls appear against him ; but the by-laws of a
lodge may enact that one or two black balls shall exclude a
candidate. — Const. Eng.

A person shall not be initiated in any lodge unless all the
members present consent. In the ballot for members already
belonging to the order, the candidates shall be admitted
according to the by-laws of each lodge. If a lodge has no
by-laws upon the subject, unanimity is required. — Const,
of Ireland.

An unanimous ballot in each degree. — Reg. III.

South Carolina is the only state within our knowledge
that requires two or more black balls to reject an applicant. — ■
Morris, Am. F. 31., iii., 74.

Reconsideration of Ballot.
After the result of a ballot has been declared, it cannot be
reconsidered — the decision is final, on tliat application. The
only exception that has the least claim to consideration, is,
that at the same meeting, if every brother present when the
ballot was first taken be still present, another ballot may be
taken. But if the meeting is closed, or called off to another
date ; or if a single member then present has since left the
lodge-room, a reconsideration cannot be had, under any cir-
cumstances.

The reconsideration of a ballot rejecting a candidate is, in
the opinion of your committee, decidedly opposed to the
ancient usages of the order, and imminently dangerous. — Com.
Juris. ML, 1853.

Closely connected with this part of the subject of balloting,

294 THE BALLOT — RECONSIDERATION OF

is that of a " reconsideration of the ballot." Sometimes, if one
or more black balls appear upon a ballot, the box is passed a
second time, and even a third time ; and sometimes the bal-
lot is "postponed" or "adjourned" or "deferred" to the next
meeting. And cases are nowise uncommon, where, at the
same or a subsequent meeting, after a rejection, a "motion to
reconsider" is made, entertained, and carried, and a new ballot
ordered, which is pronounced clear, and the candidate re-
ceived and invested with the secrets.

This last proceeding is totally at variance with masonic,
and even common justice, and a violation of the most sacred
rights of a member.

The practice of "adjourning" or "postponing" a ballot
after it has been once passed, or of " reconsidering " it when
once declared, is a bad one. It is fraught with evil, and only
evil. In nearly every case in which it is resorted to, the
object is to override the negative of the objecting brother,
and smuggle in a person obnoxious to him. This one fact
alone is sufficient to stamp the practice as inexcusably
unmasonic. — Chase, Mas. Jour., 1857.

A regular ballot according to the by-laws, on the petition
of an applicant, if unfavorable, is final, after the result, is an-
nounced. But if the Master suspect the result to be the
effect of accident or oversight, he orders a new ballot before
he pronounces the result ; but after the result is announced,
no new ballot on that application can be had at any time. A
new application must be made, after a reasonable time. —
Rockwell, D. G. M. of Ga., 1851.

Nor shall an unfavorable ballot in any case be reconsidered.
— Res. N. Y, 1854.

An unfavorable ballot for degrees or membership cannot be
reconsidered.— Lewis, G. M. of N. Y, 1858. Fuller, C. F. C.
of Tenn., 1858.

As the ballot-box is the only safeguard of the institution,
its decision should be final. — G. M. Texas, 1853.

After suck decision (announcement of result) by the Mas-
ter, there can be no reconsideration, without a special dis-
pensation therefor. — Reg. Miss.

THE BALLOT — RECONSIDERATION OP. 295

A. lodge cannot reconsider the ballot. — C. W. Mocre, 1849.
A motion to reconsider would not be admissible under any
circumstances. — lb.

A ballot, when once declared, shall be final ; nor shall any
reconsideration thereof be permitted under any pretense
whatever. — Const. Ga.

After a rejection has been definitely announced by the
Master, there can be no reconsideration of that particular bal-
lot, except by dispensation from the Grand Master. — Hellyer,
G. M. Miss., 1855.

In no case would it be proper to reconsider a balloting at
any subsequent meeting, unless all the members of the for-
mer meeting are present. — Ohio, 1846.

After the second ballot of rejection, no reconsideration can
be allowed. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1852. Com. Juris, do. Grand
Lodge do.

The Grand Lodge of Illinois does not consider it contrary
to the ancient customs and landmarks of the order ; but pre-
scribes that a reconsideration can only be had on the same
evening the candidate is black-balled. — 1853.

To reconsider a ballot is to strike a fatal blow at the
Bacredness of the ballot. — Cook, G. M. Mich., 1858.

"When a ballot is had, and the applicant rejected, that is an
end of the proceedings on that application. No reconsider-
ation can be had — no motion of the kind should be enter-
tained.— C. Moore, Mas. Rev., viii., 350.

A ballot cannot be reconsidered at a subsequent meeting.
—Smith, G. M. Ark., 1856.

In reconsidering the ballot, it is necessary that it be passed
at the same meeting, and any postponement of a ballot to a
subsequent meeting, is a violation of the Constitution of this
Grand Lodge. — Texas, 1855.

It is unmasonic to reconsider a ballot when once taken,
and the balloting closed. — Res. Texas, 1852.

The Master may, in his own discretion, order a reconsider-
ation of the ballot ; but he cannot do so on any other night

296 THE BALLOT — REPASSING.

than that on which the original ballot was taken; near if any
of the brethren who voted have retired. All who expressed
their opinion on the first ballot, must be present to express
it on the second. After the lodge is closed, the decision of
the ballot is final, and there is no human authority that can
reverse it. — Mackey, P. M. L., 207.

The ballot cannot be reconsidered under any circumstances.
— Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 186.

The practice of reconsidering votes upon applications
for the mysteries of Masonry, or for membership, is not in
accordance with the ancient usages of the order. — Iowa, 1848.

There is no such thing in Masonry as reconsidering a bal-
lot.— J. W. S. Mitchell, 1855. Lawrence, Sig. and Jour., 1856.

Repassing.
In most jurisdictions, one black ball is sufficient to reject.
If, then, upon the first ballot there is found a negative, the
candidate is virtually rejected. But upon the supposition that
the negative might be cast by mistake, it is considered cor-
rect and proper to pass the box a second time. This is only
to make it certain that there was no mistake made on the first
ballot. In some cases, even a third ballot may be passed, if,
in the opinion of the W. M., there may have been a mistake
on the first and second ballot. But, according to our best au-
thority, a third ballot is always final; and if, upon the first or
second, more than one negative appear, the candidate must be
declared rejected.

The ballot is never to be cast the second time, save for the
single end of correcting mistakes. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 26.

On the ground of mistake, the ballot may be passed the
second, or even third time ; but no more than three times.—
Hatch, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1851.

A Master has the prerogative of ordering a further ballot
for a candidate, when he knows the result of the first to be
unfavorable.— Lewis, G. M. of N. Y., 1858.

It is unconstitutional to permit a second ballot to be taken.

THE BALLOT REPASSING. 297

when more than one negative ball appears on the first ballot
— La., 1855.

If there be but one black ball, a second ballot will be in
order. A second ballot, however, settles the question ; as
does three negatives on a first ballot. — C. W. Moore, 1846.

The Master may order a second, and even a third con-
tinuous ballot ; but they must be continuous ballots, had at
the same meeting, and in strict propriety, without the in-
tervening of any other business, or delay of any kind. — lb.,
1850.

The ballot may be spread a second time in almost any case,
if the harmony of the lodge seems to require it. — Swigert,
G. M. Ky., 1858.

In any case, the result of the third ballot is final ; nor can
it be set aside or reversed by the action of the Grand Master
or Grand Lodge. — Mackey, P. M. L., 201.

It is legal to spread the ballot the third time, if for the cor-
rection of mistakes, not otherwise. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 26.

The ballots may be ordered even to a third time in a lodge ;
if then not clear, the candidate is rejected. — Haswell, C. F. C.
Vt, 1851.

In balloting,* if more than one negative vote appear, the
balloting shall cease, and the candidate be declared rejected ;
but if, on the first ballot, one negative only appear, a second
ballot shall immediately take place ; and if on the second bal-
lot a negative still appear, the candidate shall be declared re-
jected.— Reg. Me., 1857.

Where a single negative appears, the presiding officer may
allow a second ballot taken, to correct a mistake ; to ascertain
which, it may be taken a third time ; but, no more than three
times.— C. F. C. of N. H., 1852.

The Master of a lodge has the right, and should exerciso
it, to pass the ballot, if not clear, as often as he deems it neces*
eary, to avoid a mistake. — Com. Juris. 111., 1853

* *' For degrees or for membership M

13*

VISITATION

EIGHT OF VISITATION.

It is universally conceded, that the Master of a lodge has
a right to refuse admission to any visiting brother, if, in his
opinion, circumstances justify such exclusion. But upon the
question of the right of a brother in good standing to visit
any lodge, there is a difference of opinion among Grand
Lodges, and masonic writers. We are of those who believe
that a member of a lodge, in good standing, and presenting
proper vouchers, has the right to visit any lodge, at proper
times, and in a proper manner. Such right belongs to him
by virtue of his membership in a lodge, and the reasons must
be, indeed, weighty ones, to justify a refusal to admit him.
Masonry is universal. A person made a mason in any part
of the world, is recognized and entitled to all the privileges
of Masonry in any and all parts of the world. Lodges are
established for similar purposes the world over, and a mem-
ber, in good standing, in one, should be received and acknowl-
edged as such in any and all others. " Due examination, and
producing proper vouchers,"* should secure an admission
into any regular lodge on the face of the globe.

The right to visit, masonically, is an absolute right, but
may be forfeited or limited by particular regulations. — Const.
N. Y.

The right to visit masonically is an absolute right, and duty
of masons. — Const. Min.

To visit a lodge, except by such members of Grand Lodge as
have a constitutional or prerogative right so to do, is a matter
of favor and not of right ; and a presiding officer should not

* Past Master's Charge.

VISITATION RIGUT OF. 299

offend a sitting member by admitting a visitor, if a member
present shall declare, in open lodge, he cannot sit with
him.— Res. Md., 1854. The true doctrine.— C. F. C. Tenn.,
1856.

The door of Masonry must be open at the knock of every
one who has been duly initiated into its mysteries, till he is
expelled, by a competent power, from the privileges of the
masonic institution. Resolved, That * * * is entitled to
visit all the lodges within the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge.
Mass., 1821.

It is the opinon of this Grand Lodge, that it is in the power
of the Master and Wardens of any private lodge, to refuse
admission to any visitor of known bad character. — Res.
England, 1857.

Visitation is not the inherent right of a R. A. mason, but
only a privilege, and that chapters have a right to say who
they will, and who they will not admit, as visitors. — Res. Gr,
Ch. Iowa, 1856.

It is the right of all lodges working under the jurisdiction
of this Grand Lodge, to admit or reject visiting brethren, as
they in their discretion may deem best. — Res. Mich., 1857.

The committee fully concur in the principles laid down in
the resolution of the Grand Lodge of Maine, declaring that
the right (so called) to visit masonically, is not an absolute
right, " but a favor which a Master may concede or refuse at
his discretion."— C. F. C. Ky., 1857.

It is wise and expedient for all lodges to receive, at all
times, the members of sister lodges who are in good stand-
ing in their respective lodges. — Res. Mich., 1854.

Every master mason, who is an affiliated member of a lodge,
has the right to visit any other lodge as often as he may de-
sire to do so. — Mackey, P, M. L., 257.

There is no question in our mind but what a lodge has the
right to prohibit intrusion from visitors at any and all times,
at its own discretion. —Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 154.

300 VISITATION — RIGHT OF.

It is the right of all lodges to admit or reject visiting
brethren, as they may deem best. — Res. Mich., 1857.

The right to determine upon the propriety of admitting a
visiting brother, is a prerogative which every regular lodge
should possess. — hid., 1820.

The lodge has the right to determine who shall visit it. —
Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

Masons made under a dispensation have a right to visit
warranted lodges, while such dispensation is in force ; but no
longer, until they belong to some warranted lodge themselves.
— Dermott, 1772.

No member of another lodge, or non-affiliated mason, has a
right to visit a lodge, if any member of that lodge, who is
then present, shall object to it. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev., x., 364.

The Master may admit or reject visiting brethren, without
order or assent of his lodge. — Fenton, G. M. Mich., 1859.

Our brethren in Maryland have stated all the reasons, and
stated them as strongly as they can ; yet we think them insuf-
ficient to authorize the setting aside the old law of this juris-
diction, which says, in substance, that a worthy affiliated
brother has a right to visit any lodge open in any of the
degrees which he has had conferred upon him. — Mellen,
C. F. C. Miss., 1855,

On this subject we fully agree with our distinguished
brother (Mellen) of Mississippi. The fact is, as we under-
stand it, masons are all members of one great family, and no
member of the household can properly be deprived of any of
the privileges and immunities of the fraternal circle, until he
forfeits them by his own misconduct. — Storer, C. F. C.
Conn., 1856.

While this Grand Lodge acknowledges the general priv-
ilege of masons in good standing to visit any lodge in this
jurisdiction, or elsewhere, it is still the right and prerogative
of the Master of a lodge to refuse admission to visitors during
the progress of a masonic trial, or other private business.—
Res. Conn., 1858.

"VISITATION — RIGHT OF. 301

Tour committee have no doubt of the legal right of the
Master, on his own responsibility, to exclude, temporarily,
any mason, whether a member of his own lodge or other-
wise, if, in his judgment, his admission to, or continuance
within the lodge, will disturb its peace and harmony. Such
exclusion does not affect the masonic standing of the brother,
nor require any previous action of the lodge. — Lewis, Com.,
N. Y., 1855.

It is the right of a brother, in good standing, to visit all reg-
ular lodges ; but it is also the right of a lodge to refuse such
visit, if, in their opinion, their peace and harmony may be
disturbed.— N. Y., 1858.

Any resolution denning the right of a brother to visit a
lodge of his brother masons, is contrary to the spirit of
Freemasonry. We all know that a visiting brother must ask
admittance before he can enter, and that implies the power
to refuse.— Brown, C. F. C. Fla., 1858.

The Grand Lodge of England, in 1813, was on the point of
withdrawing the charter from a lodge for refusing admittance
to certain brethren as visitors. The lodge apologized, by
pleading ignorance of the " General Law."* The Board ot
General Purposes of that Grand Lodge resolved : " that it is
the undoubted right of every mason, who is well known or
properly vouched, to visit any lodge, during the time it is
opened for general masonic business, observing the proper
forms to be attended to on such occasions, and so that the
Master may not be interrupted in the performance of his
duty."

In our opinion, the admission of visitors into a lodge, is a
matter of favor, and not of right. — Morris, C. F. C. Ky., 1855.

Lodges have the right to admit or reject visiting brethren.
Mich., 1857. The Master may permit or refuse admission.—
D. G. M. Ireland, 1857.

Our conclusion is, that when a visitor is a mason in good
standing, a member of a lodge, and is vouched for, or submits

* Note u> Prestos, by Db. Oltvkb.

302 VISITATION — RIGHT OF.

to an examination, and proves himself satisfactorily, by the
proper tests, to be a mason, he has a right to visit at his
pleasure any lodge, when opened for general masonic pur-
poses.— Adams, C. F. C. La., 1858.

Visitation is a conventional right. The terms on which
it may be enjoyed, are dictated by the Grand Lodge. — C. W.
Moore, 1844.

Any brother properly avouched, and duly qualified in the
degree a lodge is occupied upon at any meeting, shall, of right,
be entitled to admission thereto. — Const. Ireland.

If the Master deem the objections reasonable, he has power
to refuse admission to a visitor. — Ohio, 1837.

A Master should not admit any visitors to whom objections
are made by any of his members. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1852.
Com. Juris.^ do. Grand Lodge do.

According to our understanding of the rights of a mason,
the right of visitation cannot be denied him, unless objec-
tions are made on moral grounds purely. We believe that a
mason, in good standing, cannot be denied the right to visit,
under any circumstances, according to the laws and constitu-
tions of the order. — Hyneman, Mir. and Key., 1859.

Every mason, in good standing, we believe, has a right to
visit lodges when at labor. A lodge cannot exclude them
without wronging them. — Bierce, C. F. C. Ohio, 1856.

The right (so called) to visit masonically, is not an absolute
right, but a favor which every lawful mason, in good stand-
ing, is entitled to ask, and which the Master may concede or
refuse, at his discretion ; and no Master of a lodge under this
jurisdiction shall admit a visitor, when positive objection to
such admission is made by a regular member, or a lodge. —
Res. Me., 1857. Cat, 1856. Rejected by La., 1858. This we
hold to be the correct view of the subject. — Parvin, C. F. C.
Iowa, 1858.

Your committee fully concur in the principles laid down in
this resolution. — McCobsle, C. F. C. Ky., 1857.

VISITING BROTHER TO SEE CHARTER — AVOUCH AL. 303

The right to visit masonicallj, is not inalienable, and may
be impaired ; every master mason, in good standing, has the
right to ask and receive this privilege, unless in the judgment
of the Master there are valid reasons for withholding it. No
Master of a lodge under this jurisdiction shall admit a visitor
when positive objection is made by a lodge or a member
which, in the judgment of the Master, justifies his exclusion
— Res. Me., 1858.

Kight of a Visiting Brother to see Charter.
It is generally conceded that a brother making application
to visit a lodge, has the right to see the charter of such lodge.
It is not only his right to see it, but it is his duty to carefully
examine it. The rule in this jurisdiction, (Massachusetts,)
requires the brother to produce his own papers, before he
has a right to call for those of the lodge he proposes to visit.
AVe believe the rule to be a consistent one.

In 1856, Wilson. Grand Master of Canada, decided, that a
visiting brother had a right to see the charter, before allow-
ing himself to be examined, and that it was his duty to care-
fully inspect it before entering the lodge.

It is not only the right, but the duty of every strange vis-
itor, carefully to inspect the warrant of Constitution before he
enters a lodge. On such a demand being made by a visitor,
every lodge is bound to comply with the requisition, and pro-
duce the instrument. The same rule applies to lodges under
dispensation. — Mackey, P. M. L., 259.

A visiting brother, having presented his Grand Lodge cer-
tificate, has a right to see the charter of the lodge. — Const.

Avouchal for Visitors.
According to the Masonic Ritual, no visitor can be admit-
ted into a lodge, without strict trial, due examination, or law-
ful information.

The Masters of subordinate lodges in this jurisdiction, are
instiucted to permit no visitor to be admitted without a pre-

304 VISITATION — AVOUCHAL.

vious examination, unless he can be vouched fur by a brother
who has sat with him in open lodge, or, if the avouchment be
made in consequence of private examination, unless the
brother, so vouching, be known to the presiding officer as a
skillful and experienced mason; and unless it be stated that
previous to the said private examination, all the requirements
of this Grand Lodge, in relation to certificates, &c, have been
fully complied with.— S. C, 1853.

No visitor, however well skilled in Masonry, shall be ad-
mitted into a lodge, unless he is personally known to, or well
vouched and recommended by, one of that lodge present. —
Eng., 1724.

To prevent evil consequences, Masters of lodges will per-
mit no mason to vouch for a brother when visiting a lodge,
without having sat in open lodge with him, unless examined
by him under the sanction of authority of the Master, given
in open lodge. — Const. Iowa.

No visitor shall be admitted into a lodge, unless he be per-
sonally known or recommended, or well vouched for, and,
after due examination, by one or more of the brethren present,
&c. — Consts. Ca. and Eng.

In the opinion of this Grand Lodge, no visitor can be per-
mitted to take his seat in a lodge, on the strength of being
avouched for by a brother, unless that brother has sat in a
lodge with him ; otherwise he must be regularly examined by
a committee of the lodge, and the lodges in this jurisdiction
are so instructed. — Res. Miss., 1856.

A brother must have sat in open lodge with another, be-
fore he can properly avouch for him. — Smith, G. M. Ark.,
1856.

Masters of lodges under this jurisdiction shall not permit
their members to vouch for visiting brethren, unless they
have sat in a lodge with them; otherwise they shall require
such visiting brethren to undergo strict examination by a
competent committee. — Res. Tenn., 1857.

VISITATION — A VOUCHAL. 305

If a positive rule is to be laid down, it would be better to
say, that no visitor shall be admitted into a lodge, except with
the avouchment of a well-known and skillful mason, or upon
examination by a committee. — Mackey, S. C, 1856.

Masters shall not permit members to vouch for visiting
brethren, unless they have sat in lodge with them; other-
wise, they shall require a strict and rigid examination by a
committee appointed for the purpose. — Penn., 1828.

Masters of lodges under this jurisdiction shall not permit
the members of lodges to vouch for visiting brethren, unless
they have sat in a lodge with them; otherwise, they shall re-
quire such visiting brethren to undergo a strict and rigid
examination by a competent committee. — Res. Ala., 1854.

The C. F. C. of Mississippi, (Mellen,) 1856, approves the
above. This is in accordance with ancient Masonry. — ■
C. F. C. Tenn., 1856.

A Master is not at liberty to admit a visitor on his personal
declaration that he is a mason, even though that declaration
be accompanied with a Grand Lodge certificate. The visitor
must first prove his qualifications for admission by the ordi-
nary tests of a personal examination, or be vouched for by a
brother, on unmistakable evidence, that he is a mason. —
C. W. Moore, 1848.

It is improper for an individual mason to examine a trav-
eling brother, for the purpose of vouching for him to visit a
lodge, without being appointed by the Master, or presiding
officer, for that purpose ; nor shall any such voucher be taken
so as to admit a visiting brother ; nor the avouchment of any
brother, unless he has previously been in a lodge with the
brother proposing to visit. — Res. Ohio, 1850. Neb., 1858.

A demit in the hands of one who cannot pass himself upon
examination, is not sufficient evidence upon which to recog-
nize him as a mason. — Teocas, 1858.

Rule for avouchal : 1. If you have sat in open lodge with
him in the degree indicated ; or, 2. If some known mason de-

306 VISITATION — AVOUCHAL.

dares to you that he has sat with him as aforesaid ; or 3. If
you have examined him under special authority from the
Master or Warden, you may lawfully vouch for him ; other-
wise, not— Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 127.

It is my order that no strange brother be admitted as a vis-
itor, unless vouched for by some brother present, who will
positively state that he has sat with him in a regular lodge,
or unless the visitor shall pass a thorough and scrutinizing
examination. — Buck, G. M. 111. 1858.

MASONIC OFFENSES

"A mason is obliged by his tenure to obey the Moral
Law;"* therefore, any violation of that law, is a masonic
offense. He is obliged to be a good man and true ; to be a
peaceable subject to the civil powers, wherever he resides or
works; never to be concerned in plots and conspiracies
against the peace and welfare of the nation ; nor to behave
himself undutifully to inferior magistrates ; to obey his ma-
sonic rulers, supreme and subordinate, in their several sta-
tions ; to work honestly ; to avoid wrangling and quarreling,
slander and backbiting;* to conform to all the established
usages and customs of the fraternity;! and is charged to in-
culcate the three great duties — to God, to his neighbor, and
to himself.']; He is also bound to the institution, and to its
members, by certain specific obligations. A violation of any
of these duties or obligations, is a masonic offense, and ren-
ders the brother so violating, liable to masonic punishment.

Masonry will not take cognizance of religious or political
offenses. Heresy is not a masonic crime. * * * When-
ever an act done by a mason is contrary to, or subversive of,
the three great duties which he owes to God, his neighbor, and
himself, it becomes at once a subject of masonic investigation,
and of masonic punishment. Besides these offenses, * * *
are unseemly and irreverent conduct in the lodge ; imprudent
conversation in relation to Masonry, in presence of the unin-
itiated ; wrangling, quarreling, backbiting, slander ; improper
revelations, undue solicitations for candidates; angry and
over-zealous arguments in favor of Masonry, with its enemies ;
every act which tends to impair the unsullied purity of the
order ; want of reverence for, and obedience to, masonic su-
periors; the expression of a contemptuous opinion ot the

* Ancient Charges, f Interrogatory to Candidates. % Charge at Initiation.

308 MASONIC OFFENSES — INTEMPERANCE, ETC.

institution ; all countenance of imposters ; and lastly, holding
masonic communion with clandestine masons, or visiting
irregular lodges. — Mackey, U~ M. L., xvii., 303.

An offense against the moral law, as revealed in the " Great
Light," is a masonic offense. So is a violation of the particu-
lar injunctions in our rituals, by-laws, rules and regulations. —
C. Moore, Mas. Rev., viii., 313.

Intemperance, Profanity, Dueling, Slander, and Gambling.
These are offenses of which a lodge can, and should, take
cognizance, and for which a brother is amenable to discipline,
and. if found guilty, may be punished, even to expulsion from
the order.

Profanity. — What offense appears to you more than all
others, the most unmasonic ? Ans. Profane swearing, beyond
a doubt. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 17.

Profanity, if persisted in, subjects to discipline. — Res. Md.,
1854. Res. Oregon, 1855. Res. N. Y., 1854.

- Duty of Master to admonish for profanity. — Tenn., 1857.
Brother V. fined — for swearing. Brother A., the same. — Old
Records, 1799. Grossly unmasonic. — Ind., 1853. A reprehen-
sible vice. — Iowa, 1858. A mason guilty of profanity, violates
his duty as a mason, and forfeits his tenure to the rights and
benefits of Masonry. — C. Moore, 1855.

Abstain from profane language, which you are all aware is
strictly forbidden, and contrary to the lessons which we are
taught in the masonic temple. — G. M. of N. C, 1853.

A mason guilty of profane swearing, forgets his first and
highest duty. — Mellen, C. F. C. Miss., 1856.

Intemperance. — Duty of Master to reprimand, in open
lodge, any member guilty of intemperance. Persistence in,
subjects to suspension or expulsion. — Res. Fla., 1856. Sus-
pension for minor offenses, and expulsion for confirmed habit
drunkenness. — Reg. Tenn., 1857. Duty of lodges to correct
evils of in members. — Ind., 1853. Lodges will be entitled to
much credit for checking the vice of excessive drinking, to

MASONIC OFFENSES — INTEMPERANCE, ETC. 309

the extent of their means. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851. We are
pleased to see that the Grand Lodge of Florida has taken
strong grounds. — C. F. C. Lid., 1855. Temperance, first virtue
enumerated in Masonry as cardinal. — Anderson, G. M. 111.,
1855.

Lodges are requested to root out the evil of intemperance
from among them.— jRes. III., 1856. This crying evil is too
much tolerated by our brethren. — Buck, G. M. do., 1858. A
known intemperate man ought not to be received. If a
brother becomes intemperate, he should be promptly dealt
with. With traffic in, and use of alcohol, Masonry has no
right to interfere ; neither can it be made an objection to a
candidate, if he be in other respects worthy. We cannot
make the total abstinence principle a test for admission, any
more than we could the creed of a religious or political sect.
— Smith, Editor A. Landmark, 1849.

Retail traffic in intoxicating drinks, is demoralizing in its
tendency, opposed to the principles of the order, and incon-
sistent with the masonic character. — Ala., 1856.

Intemperance in Masonry is immorality, and should be
treated as such. — Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

If any brother should be so void of shame as to disguise
himself with liquor, or shall come disguised to the lodge, he
shall pay a fine of two shillings, and be dismissed for the
night ; and the next lodge night that he comes, he shall be
severely reprimanded, and dealt with according to the man-
ner of masons. — By-laws 1754

Your committee are decidedly of opinion that in legislating
on the subject of temperance, the Grand Lodge of Illinois has
overstepped the mark.— C. F. C. of R. L, 1858.

For engaging in traffic intoxicating liquors, liable to strict
discipline. — Res. Oregon, 1857.

Lodges are recommended to use their utmost influence to
suppress the use of ardent spirits by members of the frater-
nity, and others.— Res. hid., 1828.

Resolved, That this Grand Lodge recommend *o the several

310 MASONIC OFFENSES — INTEMPERANCE, ETC.

subordinate lodges under this jurisdiction, that they dispense
with the use of ardent spirits at their regular and other
meetings.— N. H., 1827.

Resolved, That the first cardinal virtue, temperance, be par-
ticularly attended to by members of this, and its subordinate
lodges.— N. H., 1849.

Resolved, That it is the duty of all subordinate lodges under
this jurisdiction to restrain intemperance among their mem-
bers, if there be any guilty of this practice, and to correct
the evils thereof to the extent of their authority. — JV. Y., 1854.

Resolved, That intemperance in the use of intoxicating
drinks is an infraction of masonic obligation, and is a good
and legitimate cause for discipline, and should be punished
as other offenses. — Oregon, 1855.

In 1855, the Grand Lodge of Indiana. confirmed the expul-
sion of a member of a lodge, for being engaged in retailing
spirituous liquors. — Vide Pro., 1855. And in 1858, the same
action was taken for being engaged in the manufacturing of
whiskey.— Vide Pro., 1858.

Imperative duty of masons to abstain from gambling, pro
fane swearing, intemperance, and evil speaking. — Res. La.f
1856. Any kind of gambling or betting is unmasonic, and
subjects the offender to admonition, suspension, or expulsion.
— Res. lnd., 1818.

The vices of gambling and intemperance are in direct vio
lation of masonic principles and morality, and lodges are re-
quired to bring to immediate account any member known to
indulge in them. — Res. Iowa, 1855.

Intemperance, profanity, and gambling, are derogatory to
the principles of Freemasonry, and lodges are urged to en-
force the ancient usages for their suppression. — Texas, 1847.

A lodge has power, and it is its duty to expel, or suspend
for drunkenness, or for gambling. — Texas, 1852.

Slander subjects to expulsion. — Tenn., 1857. Gambling
unmasonic, and should ■ lot be tolerated. — lb.

MASONIC OFFENSES — NON-PAYMENT OF DUES. 311

Lodges may reprimand, suspend, or expel, for intemper-
ance, profanity, or gambling. — Res. 111., 1857. Res. Ark., 1856.
High offenses in Masonry. Deserve severe discipline. — Gr.
C/uip. N. Y., 1854.

The practice of dueling is repugnant to the principles of
Freemasonry, and in all cases where two brethren resort to
this mode of settling their disputes, it becomes the duty of
the lodge or lodges of which they are members, forthwith to
expel them from all the rights and privileges of Masonry
subject, as usual, to the confirmation of the Grand Lodge. —
S. C, 1848. Col., 1854.

Non-payment of Dues.
It is the duty of every mason to belong to some lodge, and
to contribute his proportion toward its support ; unless, for
good and sufficient reason, he be excused for the same.

If a member neglects or refuses to pay his dues, he may be
adjudged guilty of a masonic misdemeanor, and punished ac-
cordingly.

The usual penalty for such neglect or refusal, and the one
which is considered the most proper and just, is, " suspension
from membership," or " exclusion from the lodge." Expulsion
is almost universally considered as too severe a punishment
for the offense.

No member of a lodge shall be expelled from the masonic
fraternity for non-payment of arrears, but may be suspended
from membership Const. S. C.

No lodge under this jurisdiction shall suspend or expel a
member from the rights of Masonry for non-payment of dues.
The highest penalty for such delinquency, shall be forfeiture,
or suspension, of membership. — Consts. Vt., Mass., and Maine.

Arrears for one year's dues shall subject a member to be
stricken from the roll of his lodge, and the member shall
thereupon become non-affiliated ; but no act of censure, sus-
pension, or expulsion, shall be pronounced thereon, for non-
payment of dues only. — Const. N. Y. Same in Minnesota,
except words censure and suspension.

312 MASONIC OFFENSES — NON-PAYMENT OF DUES.

The penalty of expulsion for non-payment of arrears is al>
rogated by this Grand Lodge, and the only punishment to be
hereafter inflicted for such defalcation, shall be a discharge
from membership. — S. C, 1845.

The Grand Lodge of New Jersey permits suspension or ex-
pulsion for non-payment of dues. — Vide Const.

In North Carolina, the severest penalty allowed in such
cases is dismembership.

No member of a subordinate lodge shall be suspended or
expelled for non-payment of dues ; but a member may be
stricken from the roll of membership for refusing to pay his
dues. — Const. Fla.

No lodge shall expel a member for non-payment of dues ;
and though the privilege is conceded of suspending, it is re-
commended that, in ordinary cases, resort be only had to sus-
pension or deprivation of membership. — Const. D. C.

The Constitution of Louisiana permits a lodge to strike
from its roll of members any brother in arrears for one year,
and who is able to pay his dues. If he pays all arrearages
within six months after notice of such action, his membership
is renewed ; otherwise he can renew it only by paying all
arrearages, and petitioning in regular form for affiliation

The Grand Lodge of Ohio directs the suspension of every
member in arrears for dues, and if he does not discharge
them within a reasonable time, he shall be expelled.

Suspension for non-payment of dues works an absolute for-
feiture, for the time being, of all masonic privileges. — Const.
Ind*

No lodge shall expel a member from the rights of Mason y
for non-payment of dues. The penalty for such delinquency
shall be forfeiture or suspension of membership. — Const. Wis.

The penalty for non-payment of dues shall be, ineligibility
to vote or hold office, or suspension, at the option of the lodge
■ — Const. Iowa.

* This Grand Lodge impliedly permits expulsion for non-payment ci dues.—
G W. C.

MASONIC OFFENSES — NON-PAYMENT OF DUES. 313

The Constitutions of California and Oregon forbid expul-
sion or suspension for non-payment of dues, but permit strik-
ing from the roll of members.

Every lodge has the power of excluding* a member for
gross, immoral, or infamous conduct, or for non-payment of
dues. — Const. Ca.

Any member of the lodge neglecting or refusing to pay his
dues for one year, may be stricken from the roll thereof, by a
vote of the lodge, at a stated meeting. — Standard By-laws
N. Y., 1858.

No member more than twelve months in arrears shall be
eligible to any office, or allowed to vote at the election of of-
ficers. Every member, twelve months in arrears, shall be
notified of it by the Secretary, and if he then fails to dis-
charge the same, his name shall be publicly read at three suc-
cessive stated communications, and if his arrears be not then
paid, his name shall be erased from the roll, and he shall no
longer be considered a member of the lodge. — Standard By-
laws S. C, 1856.

We know no reason why a lodge should not suspend from
all the rights of Masonry those who do not abide by all the
rules and regulations of the lodge, if she deem it expedient,
when the Grand Lodge has not prescribed a particular pun-
ishment.— Mellen, C. F. C. Miss., 1856.

Members can only be suspended for non-payment of dues
after regular trial upon a charge for such offense, although
the by-laws may provide that suspension should be the pen-
alty for non-payment. — Rice, D. G. 31. Ga., 1854.

This (above) accords with the views of our Grand Lodge.
We hold that no brother can be punished until convicted, nor
convicted without a fair trial. — Perkins, C. F. C. La., 1856.

The by-laws of each lodge shall designate the amount of
dues so assessed, and the time for the payment thereof, which
shall be considered sufficient notice to each member. And

• Exclusion here sifHiiCes the same punishment as ''suspension of member-
ship " iu the United Slates

314 MASONTC OFFENSES — NON-PAYMENT OF DUES.

it is hereby made the imperative duty of the Master to cause
the Secretary to enter " suspended " every member who shall
be in arrears, and forthwith to notify him of the same ; if
within a reasonable time thereafter, as the lodge may deter-
mine, the member so suspended does not discharge his dues,
he shall be expelled. Suspension or expulsion for non-pay-
ment of dues, works an absolute forfeiture, for the time being,
of all masonic privileges. — Const. Neb.

Your committee believe that the " discharging from mem-
bership," as a penalty for non-payment of dues, is a modern
innovation, and that the ancient mode of suspension should
always be adopted. — Com. Iowa, 1848.

It is the privilege and duty of a lodge to deal severely with
members in heavy arrears for dues. — Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

Every member that does not pay his quarterage, the first
night, or second night, at farthest, of the quarter, if present,
shall be excluded from membership, and all privileges of the
lodge.— By-laws 1733.

Expulsion for non-payment of dues is unauthorized by
usage, or the general laws of the craft. An unjust practice.
— C. W. Moore.

Lodges have no right to suspend a member for non-pay-
ment of dues. The penalty for such delinquency shall be
dismissal from membership. — Md.

Contrary to the spirit of Freemasonry to suspend from priv-
ileges of Masonry generally for non-payment of dues. — Gedge,
G. M. La., 1852.

Suspension is the highest penalty known to be inflicted for
the non-payment of dues. — Washington Convention, 1842.

A member who is in arrears for dues accruing before and
after suspension, is liable therefor. A lodge may, and has the
poAver to, remit the dues of a worthy indigent brother. —
Hcbbard, Ohio, 1853.

It is an error to suppose that a persistence in not paying
dues to a lodge involves no moral delinquency. Such a

MASONIC OFFENSES — NON-PAYMENT OF DUES. 315

knowing delinquency becomes a willful violation of tho by-
laws.— lb.

Expulsion, for non-payment of dues, is too severe a penalty,
Ind., 1857.

Any lodge shall have the right to remit to indigent mem-
bers all dues whatever. — Reg. 111.

Exclusion from the lodge, for a definite or indefinite period,
for non-payment of dues, (or, as sometimes called, suspension
from the lodge, or erasure from the roll,) is pronounced, not after
a trial, but by a provision of the by-laws of the lodge, and
does not affect the standing of the member excluded, with
relation to the craft in general. Suspension from the rights
and benefits of Masonry, for non-payment of dues, is entirely
at variance with the true principles of the order. The pen-
alty should only be a suspension of rights as to his own lodge,
and should not affect the right of visiting other lodges, or
any other right inherent in him as a mason. — Mackey, U. M.
L., xvii., 311.

A brother suspended for non-payment of dues, pays only
the amount he owed at the time he was suspended. — Morris,
Am. F. M., ii., 187.

TTe have our doubts as to both the legality and the pro-
priety of expulsion for non-payment of dues ; though we have
never heard the right questioned. — 0. Moore, Mas. Rev.,
vi., 86.

Suspension or expulsion should not be inflicted for non-
payment of dues.— C. F. C. Fla., 1850.

A member removing from the jurisdiction, and neglecting
to pay his dues for one year, may be suspended without
notice. — Res. Va., 1858.

MASONIC PUNISHMENTS

The only punishments recognized in Masonry, are fines,
reprimand, (or admonition,) suspension, and expulsion.

A lodge or brother offending against any law or regulation
of the craft, or of the Grand Lodge, to the breach of which no
penalty is attached, shall, at the discretion of the Grand
Lodge, (or subordinate lodge having jurisdiction of the case,)
be subject to admonition, suspension, or expulsion. — Const.
Mass.

The Constitution of Wisconsin has the same provision, ex-
cept the clause enclosed in parenthesis. That of Canada is
nearly the same, in substance.

If the brother charged with offending be found guilty, the
lodge is required, as justice shall demand, to reprimand the
offender, suspend or expel him from all the rights and priv-
ileges of Masonry, until a thorough reformation takes place.
—Const. N. H.

And, on conviction, may punish the offender by reprimand,
suspension, or exclusion, as they may deem proper. But if
he shall be deemed worthy of expulsion, the matter shall be
reported to the next annual communication of Grand Lodge
for its action. — Const. Ga.

Subordinate lodges not only possess the power, but it
shall be their express duty to take cognizance of brethren
within their vicinities, and to suspend or expel from the priv-
ileges of the order, any brother who shall be found guilty of
unmasonic conduct. — Const. Ohio.

The penalties imposed by masonic law, are: 1st. Repri-
mand, which may be done privately, or in open lodge, by the

MASONIC PUNISHMENTS. 3H

Master; 2d. Suspension, which is either limited or indefinite ;
and 3a. Expulsion, which always implies a termination not
only of his masonic intercourse and connection with the body
indicting it, but from the masonic fraternity, unless an appeal
be made. — Const. Mm.

Punishments are of three kinds : 1st. Reprimand. 2d. Sus-
pension, which is always indefinite. 3d. Expulsion. When
the lodge has voted reprimand, the Master shall immediately
proceed to administer the reproof. If the punishment be
suspension, it shall remain until abrogated. If it be expul-
sion, it shall be submitted to the Grand Lodge, at its next
session, for approval and confirmation, but shall not take
effect until affirmed by the Grand Lodge ; but shall, in the
mear time, operate as a suspension. — Const. Iowa.

Every subordinate lodge possesses the inherent right of
suspending and expelling any of its members for unmasonic
conduct, or a violation of its particular rules and by-laws. —
Reg. Tcnn. The infringement of these regulations (by-laws
and regulations of a lodge) cannot be punished further than
a forfeiture of membership. The lodge itself can go no fur-
ther. If, however, the offense be of such magnitude as to
deserve suspension or expulsion, then a regular trial must be
had. — Com. Mass., 1857.

The Committee on Jurisprudence of the Grand Lodge of
Iowa, for 1857, say: "No brother can be divested of any
lodge privileges by any general law of a subordinate lodge,
but that he must be suspended, if done at all, by a two-thirds
vote of the members of the lodge present." This answer
was given to the question, whether it was necessary to take a
vote of the lodge to suspend a member for non-payment of
dues, when the by-laws say the same shall operate as a for-
feiture of membership. We think the Committee are right in
Baying that a lodge must vote upon the question. The pun-
ishment for forgery is imprisonment, but the punishment is
not inflicted until the forger is declared guilty, by competent
authority.— Chase, Mas. Jour. 1857.

318 MASONIC PUNISHMENTS.

When a member of a lodge has been tried upon charges
preferred against him, and has been found guilty, and sus-
pended or expelled by a vote of his lodge, from that time his
right to m.isonic intercourse ceases ; the judgment of the
lodge remains in full force and effect, until reversed on
appeal.— N. Y, 1857.

The Arkansas C. F. C, (Pike,) 1854, contends that there is
no such thing as punishments known in Masonry, and hence
definite suspensions are improper ; that a brother is worthy
to belong to a lodge, or he is not. If not worthy, the six o*
twelve month's suspension is no certain guaranty that he wih
become worthy at the end of that time ; that suspensions are
for the purpose of giving an opportunity for reformation, and
are resorted to for this purpose in place of expulsion. The
Mississippi C. F. C, (Mellen,) 1856, approves of the above.

In the Grand Lodge alone resides the power of erasing
lodges, and expelling brethren from the craft, a power which
it does not delegate to any subordinate authority in England.
— Const. Eng.

An offending brother shall be punished by admonition, cen-
sure, fine, or exclusion. — lb.

Expulsions and indefinite suspensions are the only proper
judgments of a lodge. — Mellen, 1856.

Entered apprentices and fellow crafts, if found guilty,
should be expelled or suspended from all the rights and ben-
efits of Masonry — not from the lodge as a member, for they
cannot be members. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

A censure is the mildest form of punishment that can be
inflicted by a lodge. A reprimand is the next mildest form
of masonic punishment. It should never be adopted on mere
motion, but always be the result of a regular trial. A repri-
mand, whether public or private, does not affect the masonic
standing of the offender. Exclusion, for a single meeting,
does not affect masonic standing of person excluded. Exclu-
sion, (or suspension from the lodge,) or erasure from th#roll,
for non-payment of dues; does not affect standing, with rela-

MASONIC PUNISHMENTS —FINES. 319

tion to the craft in general. The former does not abrogate
the connection between the member and his lodge, but places
his rights in abeyance only ; ihe latter terminates all connec-
tion between delinquent and his lodge. — Mackey.

A reprimand once ordered to be inflicted, cannot afterward
be reconsidered, any more than a ballot once declared can be.
—Hall, G. M. Texas, 1858.

The only penalties known to Freemasonry, are expulsions,
suspensions, and reprimands. — Vt, 1834. Morris, Code, 145.

Fines.
The imposition of pecuniary punishment, m the form of
fines, though it has the sanction of antiquity, and, until the
present century, general custom, is now quite generally dis-
continued. While we are far from considering them " unma-
sonic," or " contrary to the spirit of Freemasonry," we cheer-
fully acquiesce in the general opinion, that reprimand, or
suspension, is more consistent with the principles which
should govern in the punishment of masonic offenses.

Members not attending, when appointed, on a committee,
shall forfeit four shillings. — By-laws, 1757.* (Nine similar
penalties enumerated in the same code.)

No lodge is permitted to make masons for less fee than one
guinea and a half, under penalty of a fine of one guinea and a
half for each offense. — Con^t. Ireland, 1836. (Several similar
penalties prescribed in the same Constitution.)

Though not objectionable, it may, nevertheless, upon a re-
consideration, and recurrence to other authorities, be found
to be more masonic to omit them. — Paul Revere, G. M. Mass.,
1795.

The Grand Master of North Carolina, (Jenkins,) 1851.
disapproves of imposing fines, for non-attendance on lodge
meetings ; in which opinion the C. F. C. of New York, (Hatch,)
1852, agrees with him.

* We do not remember examining a single code of by-laws of the last cen-
tury, in which fines wero n(t recognized as a masonic punishment. — G. W. C.

320 MASONIC PUNISHMENTS REPRIMAND.

The imposing of fines, by the lodge, is not contrary to ma-
sonic law or usage. The opinion is very prevalent, that fines
are unmasonic. I have held this opinion myself; but, after
fuller investigation, I cannot find anything in the Constitu-
tions of Masonry to forbid them. On the contrary, in the
present Constitutions of the Grand Lodges of England, Ire-
land, and Scotland, fines are expressly recognized, and pro-
vided for.*— Rockwell, B. G. M. Ga.. 1857.

All fines in masonic lodges are unconstitutional. — La., 1854.

The imposition of pecuniary fines for the non-performance
of masonic duties, we do not consider in accordance with the
principles or spirit of Masonry. — Ark., 1847. Iowa, 1848.
Texas, 1854.

It is contrary to the principles of Freemasonry, to inflict pe-
cuniary fines for non-attendance. — Mackey, Lexicon, 15.

Fines and pecuniary punishments, in Masonry, are illegal.
— Morris. Am. F. ikf., ii., 170. Fines are unmasonic. — lb., iii.,
168.

If any brother propose anything which he knows to have
been rejected in this lodge, * * * the said brother shall
pay a fine of two shilings and six pence for the first offense,
five shillings for the second, * * *. — By-laws Lodge of Anti-
quity, London, 1791.

Heprimand.

A censure, admonition, or, more properly speaking, a repri-
mand, is the mildest form of masonic punishment, except that
of a fine. It is administered for light offenses, and where
suspension would be too severe a punishment. It may be
either private, (that is, where no one is present, except the
Master and the offending brother,) or public, (that is, in tli3
presence of the whole lodge,) and may be administered by a
majority vote, and without a formal trial, on charges pre-
ferred.

* Fines have always been recognized and prescribed, in the Constitutions at
Connecticut. — G. W, C.

MASONIC PUNISHMENTS SUSPENSIONS. . 321

It does not affect the standing of the brother to whom it is
Administered, being merely a friendly reproof, for a slight de-
viation from the Hue of the masonic square.

Suspensions.
Suspension is a term covering a large space in the cata-
logue of masonic punishments; and, like that of "imprison-
ment," in the civil code, may be of greater or less severity as
a punishment. Suspension, of any kind, or degree, should
not be inflicted, except after a regular trial and conviction,
on charges duly preferred.

Suspension of Membership. — This deprives the suspended
brother of all. his rights and privileges as a member of the
lodge suspending him, but does not affect his general standing
otherwise. His right of visitation is not impaired, even so
far as the suspending lodge is concerned. He is somewhat
in the situation of a non-affiliated mason, except that he can-
not apply for membership in any lodge, while under such sus-
pense n; neither can any other lodge admit him to member-
ship while he remains so suspended. Suspension of mem-
bership may be either definite or indefinite. The former is
usual in cases of suspension for non-payment of dues, (though
this may, in one sense, be said to be an indefinite suspension,)
and the brother is restored whenever he pays his arrearages.

If indefinitely suspended from membership, he can only be
reinstated by specific action on the part of the lodge, either
on petition, or otherwise.

Forfeiture of Membership, or Erasure from the Roll,
places the brother in the position of a non-affiliated mason,
and leaves him at liberty to join any lodge that will receive
him. To do so, he must apply by regular petition, which
petition must take the usual course.

Definite Suspension, suspends until the expiration of the
specified period, when the brother returns to all the rights
and privileges from which he was suspended, ivithout action
of any kind. His term of punishment having terminated, his
disability is removed. Definite suspensions, however, except
14*

322 MASONIC PUNISHMENTS — SUSPENSIONS.

in cases of non-payment of dues, are now generally considered
as inconsistent with the spirit of Masonry, and are fast be-
coming obsolete.

Indefinite Suspension, — A brother indefinitely suspended
from all the rights and privileges of Masonry, is, for the time
being, as completely deprived of them, as an expelled mason.
He has no claims upon the fraternity, as such ; nor has his
family. He is, however, still subject to the disciplinary
power of Masonry, and may be charged, tried, and expelled,
for gross misconduct. He can only be reinstated by the
lodge which suspended him, if it be in existence, which may
do so at any time, or by petition, or otherwise, at its dis-
cretion.

From this date, no lodge shall suspend any brother for a
definite time, but all suspensions shall be for indefinite
periods. — Res. Miss., 1856. Res. Texas, 1857.

Hereafter, no subordinate lodge, under this jurisdiction,
shall suspend a member for a definite period ; but all suspen-
sions shall simply be recorded that, the offender "be and
is hereby suspended from all the rights, benefits, and priv-
ileges of Masonry." — Res. Cat., 1855.

In 1850, the Grand Master of Mississippi suspended two
members of a subordinate lodge from all the privileges of
Masonry, until reinstated by the Grand Lodge. To this the
C. F. C. of Florida say : that they consider the act an assump-
tion of power not warranted by the Constitutions of Masonry ;
that the Grand Master may suspend any lodge, or officer of
the lodge, from his official station, for good cause ; but the
Subordinate or Grand Lodge only have the right to expel a
member from the privileges of Masonry. The C. F. C. of
New York, 1851, say: "We think the act ne3ds no defense.
It is both a power, right, and duty."

A limited suspension is a different thing ; then, the person
suspended becomes restored on the expiration of his sen-
tence, without any action on the part of the lodge, or the
body inflicting the punishment This principle, we believe

MASONIC PUNISHMENTS — SUSPENSIONS. 323

is recognized by all who are entitled to be regarded as au-
thority, and it is based upon the fact, that the offending
brother has paid the penalty of his delinquency. — King, C. F.
C.ofN. Y., 1853.

A suspension, for a specified time, ceases by its own limit-
ation, so far only as to authorize the delinquent to present
his petition to the lodge for a release from his disability. We
cannot admit that the expiration of the term of suspension,
per se, restores the delinquent to his privileges. If the orig-
inal cause of the suspension continues, the lodge may refuse
to restore him ; which would be a continuance of the suspen-
sion. The restoration must be the act of a power equal to
that of the lodge. — C. W. Moore.

The C. F. C. of Arkansas, (Pike,) 1854, takes the same
ground as above.

Indefinite suspension is illegal. — Mo., 1857.

Striking name from the roll of members, does not affect
standing, nor debar from any privilege, except membership
in the particular lodge.-^G. M. La., 1858.

"Where the Grand Master arrested the charter of a lodge,
and the Grand Lodge suspended the lodge, for one year, and.
at the end of the time, restored the charter to a part of the
original members, on petition ; held, that the suspension did
not apply to individuals, but to the lodge, as such; that the
members not included in the restoration of the charter, were
simply non-affiliated masons, and could be readmitted to
membership only in the usual manner. — C. W. Moore, 1858.

A mason cannot be suspended from the privileges of Ma-
sonry, except on conviction after trial. — G. M. La., 1857.

On the question of the right or expediency to suspend
definitely, we are not prepared to express a decided opinion-
Something may be said against the expediency, and even
right, of such a judgment. — Mellen, Acacia, 1855.

We have come to the conclusion, that definite suspensions
should be expelled from our statute book. — lb., 1856.

324 MASONIC PUNISHMENTS — SUSPENSIONS.

Suspension is a deprivation, for the time being, of ail ma-
sonic privileges. — Washington Convention, 1842.

Suspension of a subordinate lodge, by the Grand Lodge,
only affects the standing of the individual members so far as
they participate in disregarding the edicts of the Grand
Lodge, after the first information thereof comes to their
knowledge ; provided such individuals, by their acts, shall not
have been the cause of the Grand Lodge's suspending the
lodge.—JRes. EL, 1847. Res. Ohio, 1848.

A member under suspension does not thereby lose his
right to membership, and is, therefore, liable to pay dues. —
Hubbard, Ohio, 1852. Com. Juris, do. Grand Lodge do.

A suspension from membership, by a subordinate lodge,
does not require any action of the Grand Lodge to make it
final.— Parvin, C. F. C. Iowa, 1848.

The practice of suspending from the privileges of Masonry,
(for non-payment of dues,) without the formalities of a fair
and open trial, I believe to be wrong. — Gedge, G. M. La.,
1852. We concur in the opinion. — Parvin, C. F. C Iowa,
1852.

No brother can be divested of any lodge privileges by any
general law of a subordinate lodge; but he must be sus-
pended, if done at all, by a vote of two-thirds of the members
of the lodge present. — Iowa, 1857.

That no member can be suspended or expelled, or other-
wise deprived of his rights, without due trial, on charges pre-
ferred, is too well settled to be now discussed. — Mo., 1857.

By-laws should not provide for suspension of membership,
without due notice. — Texas, 1858.

Definite suspension does not terminate connection with the
craft, but only places it in abeyance. The delinquent is, for the
time, placed beyond the pale of Masonry; he is deprived of
all his rights as a master mason. It must always be preceded
by a trial. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 313.

By indefinite suspension the person is deprived of all his

MASONIC PUNISHMENTS — SUSPENSIONS. 325

rights and privileges as a mason, until the lodge shall see fit,
by a special action, to restore him. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii.,
314.

Grand Lodges have not usually claimed any control over
cases of suspension. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 74.

A sentence of suspension can be reconsidered at any time,
by the proper authority. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 82.

We are disposed to indefinite suspensions, always, in prefer-
ence to definite suspension. — Lawrence, Sig. and Jour., 1856.

In the opinion of this Grand Lodge, every suspension
should be for an indefinite period of time. — Res. Va., 1858.

A suspended member is amenable to the laws of the order,
and may be dealt with by the lodge under whose jurisdiction
he resides, for offenses against our rules, as though no decree
of suspension had been pronounced against him. — Hubbard,
Ohio, 1852. Com. Juris, do. Grand Lodge do.

When a mason is suspended for any cause whatever, he is,
for the time of such suspension, debarred from all the rights
and privileges of the order. — Const. Iowa, 1844.

Suspension from the lodge does not abrogate the connec-
tion between the member and his lodge, but places his rights
in abeyance only. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 311.

Suspension from the rights and benefits of Masonry in-
cludes also a suspension from the payment of arrears. —
Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 315.

Expulsion. — This is the severest punishment known to
Masonry, and is only inflicted for crimes and offenses of the
gravest nature. An expelled mason is completely divested
of every right and privilege he ever enjoyed as a mason;
and his family also cease to have any masonic claim upon the
fraternity. Such a person can only be restored by the Grand
Lodge, with the consent of the lodge which expelled, and on
petition duly presented. He can never apply to any other
lodge for admission, and no other lodge has a right to receive
him. He cannot even be reinitiated in any lodge.

326 MASONIC PUNISHMENTS — SUSPENSIONS.

A sentence of expulsion does not take effect until con-
firmed by the Grand Lodge, though it operates as a suspen-
sion in the meantime.

Expulsion is the highest masonic penalty that can be im-
posed by a lodge upon any of its delinquent members. It
deprives the party expelled of all the rights and privileges
he ever enjoyed, not only as a member of the lodge ejecting
him, but of the fraternity at large. — Mackey, Lexicon, 145.

All unworthy, or suspended, or expelled masons, are
strictly forbidden the privilege of visiting any lodge, of join-
ing in any masonic procession, of receiving assistance or re-
lief, or masonic burial. — Const. N. Y.

The wife and children of an expelled mason sustain the
same relationship to the organized masonic fraternity, that the
wife and children of any other man do who never was a
mason. — Com. Mas. Law, Ark, 1856.

A member that has been regularly expelled, for unmasonic
conduct, is forever debarred from the privileges of the order.
No lodge can take further cognizance of, or restore him to his
privileges, unless by authority of the Grand Lodge. — Hub-
baed, Ohio, 1852. Com. Juris, do. Grand Lodge do.

The only proper tribunal to impose this heavy punishment,
is a Grand Lodge. The sentence of the subordinate lodge is
of no force until its Grand Lodge has confirmed it. — Mackey,
Lexicon, 145.

A lodge cannot expel a suspended mason without first re-
instating him. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 178.

We doubt whether a lodge can expel forever; that is, so
expel that he can never be restored. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev.,
xiv., 115.

No lodge under this jurisdiction, nor any member thereof,
shall publish, or in any way make known, except to the fra-
ternity, or within the lodge, the expulsion of a member,
further than to state verbally the fact of expulsion, whenever
the interest of Masonry may seem to demand it. — Res, N. H.}
1820.

MASONIC PUNISHMENTS — SUSPENSIONS. 321

Suspension and Expulsion between Lodge, Chapter, &c. — ■
Under the American organization, a brother suspended from
the rights and privileges of Masonry, or expelled, by a lodge,
is, without further action, suspended from chapter, council, and
encampment. If only his membership be suspended, or for-
feited, in the lodge, it does not affect his standing in the
higher degrees, unless there be a local regulation to the con-
trary.

Suspension or expulsion from a higher body, does not
affect the standing of the brother in a lower one ; e. g., expul-
sion from a chapter, or encampment, does not disturb mem-
bership in the lodge.

As a general rule, a brother should not be tried in a chap-
ter, council, or encampment, except for an offense not cogni-
zant by his lodge. For all offenses of which a lodge may
take cognizance, he should be tried by his lodge.

If, however, the higher body suspend or expel him, for
such an offense, it is the duty of any member of the lodge
who may be cognizant of such action, to file charges against
him in the blue lodge, which should then proceed, in the usual
manner, to investigate them, and deal with him.

No mason shall be permitted to visit this, or any subordi-
nate lodge, while he is under suspension in a chapter of K. A.
masons. — Res. Ohio, 1819.

I understand the masonic law to be, that a chapter has not
the power to suspend a member from the privileges of the
lodge. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

The Grand Lodge of Indiana, 1848, passed resolutions, in
substance, as follows: "When a reputed Royal Arch mason
is suspended or expelled from a chapter of such, on charges
not involving a breach of the morals of Masonry, he shall
not be considered suspended or expelled from the rights and
privileges of ancient craft Masonry. But if the charges in-
volve a breach of moral code, it shall be lawful for any chap-
ter or member thereof, to prefer a complaint against him be-

328 MASONIC PUNISHMENTS — SUSPENSIONS.

fore the lodge having jurisdiction, which shall proceed, in the
usual form, to investigate and punish, or otherwise."

Expulsion from the blue lodge, expels, without further
action, from all the other masonic bodies with which he
may be connected — chapter, council, or encampment. — Mor-
ris, Am. F. M., iii., 121.

No mason shall be permitted to visit a lodge who is under
suspension from a Royal Arch chapter. — Ohio, 1819.

Expelling from a chapter does not exclude from the lodge.
— C. Moore, Mas. Rev., vi., 11. Expulsion from the blue
lodge cuts off from masonic fellowship in all other bodies. —
lb. xiii., 242.

Expulsion from lodge suspends all masonic privileges —
suspends in chapter. No action necessary in chapter. Res-
toration in lodge restores in chapter, unless the chapter took
separate action, in which case action is necessary in restora-
tion.— C. W. Moore.

Expulsion from chapter does not expel or suspend from
blue lodge.— Ky., 1842. C. W. Moore, 1848. Ill, Mo., Ky.,
Ala., and Va., 1847. N. Y., 1848. F. M. King, 1852. C. F. C.
of R. L, 1850. Ark., 1855. Bierce, C. F. C. Ohio, 1856.
Iowa, 1849.

A member of a chapter, if expelled or suspended from a
lodge of master masons, shall be excluded from all the priv-
ileges of Royal Arch Masonry, during such suspension or ex-
pulsion.— Grand Chap. Term;, 1842.

When a Sir Knight is expelled or suspended by a lodge or
chapter having lawful jurisdiction over him, he is thereby cut
off from all masonic intercourse with his encampment and its
governing bodies. — G. G. Enc. ,1852.

A compact exists between the Grand Lodge, Grand Chap-
ter, Grand Encampment, and Grand Council of Rites of Ire-
land, by which it is agreed that any brother excluded, sus-
pended, or restored by one of the contracting parties, shall,
on the case being officially communicated to the others, be, by

MASONIC PUNISHMENTS — SUSPENSIONS. 329

theni, severally excluded, suspended, or restored, as the case
may be, without further inquiry or investigation. — G. W. C.

Expulsion from an encampment, chapter, or council, does
not necessarily suspend or expel from subordinate lodges. —
Res. Ala., 1848. Term., 1843. Cal., 1854.

An expulsion from a lodge for no alleged cause but an ex-
pulsion from a chapter, is improper and unjust. — C. F. C. of
N. II., 1849.

Does expulsion from a Royal Arch chapter, or encampment,
necessarily expel from a blue lodge ? We believe not. We
think that a member of a blue lodge can only be expelled by
a lodge to which he belongs. — Haswell, C. F. C. Vt, 1849.

Does expulsion from one of what is called the higher
degrees of Masonry, such as a chapter or an encampment,
affect the relations of the expelled party to blue Masonry?
We answer, unhesitatingly, it does not. In this opinion, we
are supported by the best authority, though the action of
some Grand Lodges, as that of New York, are averse to it.
* * * Expulsion from a blue lodge involves expulsion
from all the higher degrees. Because, as they are composed
of blue masons, the members could not, of right, sit and hold
communications on masonic subjects with one who was an
expelled mason. — Mackey, Lexicon, 148.

But few Grand Lodges have taken action directly on this
subject. Those which have decided in the negative, are, so
far as we have 1 ee;. able tc discover from their reports, the
Grand Lodges of New York, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Flor-
ida. Those of Maryland and Arkansas have spoken in the
affirmative. The Grand Masters and committees of corres-
pondence of some others have noticed the subject ; and, we
believe, all, or nearly all, have decided in the negative. And
with this opinion your committee cheerfully coincide. —
C. F. C. of R. I., 1850.

The Committee on Masonic Jurisprudence of the Grand
Lodge of Ohio, (1855,) reported: that they, as members of
this Grand Lodge, are ancient master masons only, and, there

330 MASONIC PUNISHMENTS — SUSPENSIONS.

fore, know nothing about the law governing chapters, in the
expulsion of members, or whether they even expel them.
Nor do they know anything about the degrees in a chapter,
or mode of conferring them — if they have any — and have not
observed anything in or about this Grand Lodge that would
lead to the discovery of the same ; and, therefore, ask to be
discharged from the further consideration of the business of
the chapters. — [Report adopted]

If a reputed R. A. mason be suspended or expelled by a
reputed R. A. chapter, on charges for a breach of the moral
code, and which is prohibited by, and against, the rules and
spirit of ancient craft Masonry, all masonic intercourse is
hereby interdicted, until such sentence shall be repealed, by
the tribunal passing such sentence, or reversed by the tribu-
nal having appellate jurisdiction thereon. — Res. Md., 1849.

Expulsion from a chapter shall be considered an expulsion
from all the privileges of Masonry. — Res. Ind., 1826. (Re-
pealed in 1848.)

MASONIC TRIALS

Nearly all of the Grand Lodges have incorporated intc
their Constitutions a few general rules for the government of
their subordidate lodges, in conducting masonic trials. These
rules, or regulations, may be classed as follows : — 1. Charges ;
2. Service of notice ; 3. Examination ; 4. Testimony ; 5.
Judgment; 6. Punishment; 7. Appeals; 8. Restoration.

Upon each of these points we shall quote authorities suf-
ficient to indicate the general law and usage, which governs
in masonic trials and punishments.

1. Charges. — Whenever a member of a lodge, or a brother,
shall be accused of any offense, which, if proved, would sub-
ject him to suspension or expulsion, the accusation shall be
made in writing, under the signature of a master mason, and
given in charge to the Secretary of the lodge. — Consts. Me.,
Yt.. Mass., Wis., Col., R. I.

All complaints or charges against a brother shall be made
in writing, if proper to be written, be signed by the master
mason or master masons making the same, and shall specific-
ally set forth the cause of grievance. — Const. D. C.

All charges must be made in writing, signed by the
accuser, delivered to the Secretary, and read by him at the
next regular communication of the lodge. — Const. S. C.

All the charges and specifications shall be made in writing,
and filed with the Secretary of the lodge. — Const. Fla.

The charges and specifications shall be made in writing,
under the signature of a master mason, or the committee of
the lodge, and delivered to the Secretary of the lodge. — .
Consts. Ala., Mo., and Kansas.

332 MASONIC TRIALS.

All charges of unmasonic conduct against a brother must
be in writing, and clearly specify the offense or offenses com-
plained of; be signed by the party making them ; contain the
names and residences of the witnesses, and be presented to
the Master of the lodge to which the accused belongs, or in
whose jurisdiction he may reside, if a sojourning brother. —
Const. La.

No subordinate lodge shall proceed to suspend or expel a
brother for unmasonic conduct of any description whatever,
except for non-payment of dues, unless it be upon written
charges and specifications made out and filed with the Secre-
tary.— Consts. Ohio, Neb., and Ind.

All charges proper to be written, shall be made in writing.
* * * All charges for unmasonic conduct committed
while the craft is at labor, shall be preferred by the Senior
Warden, and all charges for such conduct, while the craft is
at refreshment, (including the time intervening between the
various meetings of the lodge,) shall be preferred by the
Junior Wardens. If the Wardens are unable to act, the Mas-
ter may appoint any master mason who is a member of the
lodge to prefer such charges, and act on the part of the
lodge. Any brother feeling himself aggrieved, shall request
the proper Warden to prefer charges against the brother injur-
ing him. In case the Warden refuse to act, the brother has
full authority to prefer such charges himself. When two ,
brethren reside within the jurisdiction of different lodges, the
brother aggrieved shall first apply to the Warden of the lodge
to which the offending brother is amenable ; and in case that
officer refuse to act, he may apply to his own lodge, and that
lodge may, by resolution, request the proper officer of the
sister lodge to prefer the charges against the offending
brother ; and in case of such a resolution, duly certified by the
Master and Secretary, being handed to the presiding officer
of a sister lodge, it shall be his duty to take notice of the
6ame, and govern himself accordingly. — Const. Min.

All charges for unmasonic conduct shall be in writing, spe-
cifying with reasonable certainty the character of the offense

MASONIC TRIALS. 333

alleged, signed by the accuser, and delivered to the Secretary.
It is not essential that the accuser should be a mason. A
charge of immoral conduct may be preferred by a profane.
But it is made the especial duty of the Junior Warden, in the
absence of other accusers, to prefer all charges for offenses
committed when the lodge is not at labor. — Const. Iowa.

"When a subordinate lodge shall deal with, or proceed
against a brother, for unmasonic conduct, of any description
whatever, the lodge shall cause written charges and specifica-
tions to be made, and filed with the Secretary of said lodge.
—Const. Ky.

Such brother shall be furnished in writing, with a copy of
the charges against him. — Reg. Tenn.

Whenever a member of a subordinate lodge shall desire to
prefer charges against another, he shall furnish the Master of
said lodge with a copy of the charges he makes, with full spe-
cifications. The Master shall report the same to the lodge, at
its next stated meeting, concealing the name of the informant,
and appoint three disinterested members to investigate the
charges, who shall report, as soon as practicable, upon the
propriety of instituting a trial upon said charges. — Const. Ark.

All complaints and charges brought against a brother
before a lodge, proper to be written, shall be reduced to
writing, and filed with the Secretary. — Consts. Cal. and
Oregon.

All complaints and charges against a brother, to be tried
in any lodge under this jurisdiction, shall be reduced to writ-
ing, specifically setting forth the cause of grievance, and
signed by the complainant or complainants. — Const. Md.

No brother of this lodge shall be suspended or expelled
from membership, unless charges be preferred, duly specify-
ing his offense, presented by a brother in good standing, and
the accused being allowed full opportunity to make his de-
fense.— Standard By-laws of N. Y., 1858.

A mason cannot be arraigned and tried for unmasonic con-
duct generally. A brother under suspension cannot bo

BiJ4 MASONIC TRIALS — OF A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES.

Drought before the lodge for iinmasonic conduct during the
term of his suspension. — N. C, 1854.

It is desirable that charges be preferred by a member,
rather than by the Master ; though in certain cases it may bo
the duty of the latter to do so. — C. W. Moore, 1848.

Charges cannot be preferred by a non-mason. If they in-
volve masonic character, the lodge may investigate and deter-
mine the matter. — Rice, D. G. M. Ga., 1855.

Charges for unmasonic conduct must be accompanied with
specifications, or there can be no trial. — Swigeet, G. M. Ky.,
1855.

If the by-laws do not designate an accuser, any member of
the lodge may prefer charges against another. — Swigert,
G. M. Ky., 1858.

Charges must be made in writing, signed by the accuser,
and delivered to the Secretary, who reads them at the next
stated communication. A time and place are then appointed for
the trial. It is not essential that the accuser should be a mason,
A charge of immoral conduct can be preferred by a profane. —
Mackey, U. M. £., xvii., 322.

The proper person to bring charges in a lodge is the
Junior Warden. — Morris, Am. F. M., hi., 33.

A profane cannot bring charges against a master mason. —

F. M. Lon. Qu., 1842, 470. In which opinion we coincide. —

G. W. C.

Position of a Brother under Charges.

The mere filing of charges against a brother, does not, of
itself, deprive him of any of his masonic rights or privileges,
lie may still exercise any and aU of them, until the time ap-
pointed for an investigation of such charges.

A brother against whom charges are pending, cannot be
allowed a demit. Such brother is not debarred from filing
counter charges, or other charges, against his accuser, or any
other brother. If a brother be acquitted, after regular trial

MASONIC TRIALS — OP A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES. 335

on charges preferred, his membership and standing is not
disturbed > though if an appeal be taken from such decision,
he cannot be allowed to demit during the pendency of such
appeal.

The removal of a brother out of the jurisdiction, while
charges are pending against him, does not abate such charges
or affect the jurisdiction of his lodge over him, in investiga-
ting them.

Charges made and pending against a member of a lodge,
do not debar him from the usual rights of members ; such as
balloting in all cases, in common with his brethren, and vot-
ing also, in all cases, except upon his own guilt or innocence
of the charges against him. — Hubbard, G. 31. Ohio, 1851.

No officer, against whom specific charges of unmasonic
conduct are preferred, shall be competent to discharge the
duties of his office, until a final decision is made upon said
charges; provided, that where a Master is so charged, he shall
not be suspended from the functions of his office, unless in
the judgment of the Grand Master, or Deputy Grand Master,
the nature of the charges, or the good of Masonry require it.
— Const. Ga.

No Master, Warden, or other officer of any subordinate
lodge, against whom any specific charges of unmasonic con-
duct are preferred, is competent to discharge the duties of
his office, until a final decision shall be made on said charges.
— Const. Va.

Charges against a brother do not, before trial, render him
ineligible to office, or suspend him from office, he being enti-
tled to the presumption of innocence till the charges be
proved.— Lewis, G. M. of N. Y., 1858.

In 1855, the Grand Lodge of South Carolina called one of
its subordinate lodges to account for granting a demit to a
brother while charges were pending against him.

The fact of being under charges does not exclude a mason
from the privilege of preferring charges against another.—
Res. S. C, 1856. Abell, C. F. C. CaL, 1858.

336 MASONIC TRIALS — OF A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES.

A brother is not under censure from the mere fact that
charges are preferred and are pending against him in the
lodge. Some improper or unmasonic conduct must first be
proved against him, and he must be found guilty by a vote of
the lodge, before he can be said to be under the censure of
the lodge. — Com. Ala., 1851.

Where a brother was tried and acquitted by a lodge, and,
during the pendency of an appeal, the lodge allowed him to
demit, the Grand Lodge of Mississippi (1857) decided, such an
act was irregular and improper ; and that the removal of a
brother to another jurisdiction does not take away the right
of the lodge on the reversal of an appeal to re-try the case.

Subordinate lodges have the discretionary right of suspend-
ing a member, while under a criminal prosecution, until his
case is decided by the civil authorities, and then to be finally
acted upon ; but in no case shall the action of the lodge be
made public until after final action of the civil authorities. —
Res. Texas, 1857.

A brother cannot be allowed to resign his membership
while under charges for unmasonic conduct. — Res. Prov. Gr.
Lodge C. W., 1848.

A Master would not be at liberty to sign a diploma while
charges were pending against a member, nor after his convic-
tion. But he would be bound, if the brother stood unim-
peached before the lodge, to present charges, or resign his
office.— C. W. Moore, 1848.

The removal of a brother out of the jurisdiction of the
lodge, after the charges are preferred against him, does not
abate the same. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1852. Com. Juris, do.
Grand Lodge do.

The accused is to be considered innocent, and is entitled to
all masonic privileges, until proved to be guilty. — Swigert,
G. M. Ky., 1858.

It is not proper for a lodge to grant a demit to a brother
who is under charges of unmasonic conduct before the lodge,

MASONIC TRIALS — OF A BROTHER DNDKR CHARGES. 33 f

or whose conduct has been such as to render him justly sub-
ject to such charges. — C. F. C. Ark., 1857. Fuller, C. F. C.
Tenn., 1858.

"Wrong- for a lodge to demit a brother, while under charges.
— Morris, Am. F. 31., v., 101.

A brother who is under charges can bring charges against
his accuser, if the lodge choose to receive them. — Morris, Am.
F. 31, in., 33.

A mere charge against a brother, does not deprive him of
the rights and privileges of a mason. They are not forfeited
until he has been tried and found guilty. — C. Moore, Mas.
Rev., xiv., 248.

The accused ceases to be in good standing from the time
charges are filed in the lodge, and is not at liberty to visit
any lodge, until he is acquitted. — J. W. S. Mitchell, 1856.

If a member of a lodge is regularly tried and acquitted
upon charges preferred, his membership is not thereby dis-
turbed.— G. M. of Ky., 1857. Grand Lodge of Ky., 1857.

2. Service of Notice. — The Secretary of the lodge, under
the direction of the Master, shall serve, or cause the accused
to be served, with an attested copy of the charges, and shall
give him seasonable notice of the time and place of hearing,
if his residence be known. — Const. 3Ie. and R. I.

The Secretary of the lodge, by direction of the Master,
shall serve, or cause to be served, upon the accused, an at-
tested copy of the charges, as follows : If residing within ten
miles of the lodge, fourteen days, at least, previous to the
time appointed for the examination. If residing more than
ten miles therefrom, but within the state, by forwarding by
mail, or other conveyance, said copy, and a summons to ap-
pear and show cause, at least twenty days previous to said
examination. If residing out of the state, and unknown, the
lodge may proceed, ex parte; but if known, said copy and
summons shall be forwarded him, at least sixty days previous
to the time fixed for the examination. — Const. Vt,
15

338 MASONIC TRIALS — OP A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES.

The Secretary of the lodge, under the direction of the Master,
shall serve, or cause the accused to be served, with an at-
tested copy of the charges, at least fourteen days previous to
the time appointed for the examination, provided his residence
be known, and it be within fifty miles of the place where the
lodge, having the matter in hand, is located. If his residence
be at a greater distance than fifty miles, but within the state,
then a summons must be sent him, by mail, or otherwise, at
least twenty days before the time of trial. If his residence
be out of the state, and unknown, the lodge may proceed to
examine the charges, ex parte; but if known, a summons shall
be sent him by mail, or otherwise, sixty days, at least, before
the time appointed for the examination. — Const. Mass.

No lodge may exclude or suspend a brother at an extra
meeting, nor without giving him due notice, if practicable, of
the charge preferred against him, and of the time appointed
for its consideration. — Const. Venn.

Before any action shall be had thereon by any lodge, it
must be made clearly to appear that the accused has been
furnished with a true copy of said complaint or charges, at
least one week prior thereto, if in writing, and if not, that
they have been made known to him by a committee ap-
pointed for that purpose. — Const. B. C.

Every brother who may be charged with unmasonic con-
duct, shall, in due time, be furnished with a copy of the
charges to be exhibited against him, if they be proper to be
written ; and if they be not, the said charges shall be made
Known to him by a committee, appointed for that purpose. —
Consts. Va. and Ga.

Whenever charges are preferred against a brother, he shall
be notified or cited through the post office, or otherwise, at
least ten days before the day of trial, and be furnished with
a copy, under the Secretary's hand, of the charges and speci-
fications.— Const. N. C.

The accused shall then be presented with an attested cop>
of the charges, and he shall, at the same time, be informed of

MASONIC TRIALS Of A BROTIIER LNDER CHARGES. 339

the time and place appointed by the lodge for the trial. Il
the accused is living beyond the jurisdiction of the lodge, the
charges shall be communicated to him by letter through the
post-office, and a reasonable time be allowed for his answer,
before the lodge proceeds to trial. If the residence of the
accused is not known, or if he refuses or neglects to attend
the lodge may, nevertheless, proceed to the trial, without his
presence, a reasonable time in the former case being allowed
for the necessary search for him. — Const. S. C.

It shall be the duty of the Secretary of the lodge to cause a
copy of the charges, duly made out, to be delivered to the
accused, with reasonable notice of the time for taking testi-
mony.— Const. Fla.

The Secretary shall make out a true copy of the charges
and specifications, attest the same, and deliver, or cause it
to be delivered, to the accused, at least ten days before the
time of trial. If the residence of the accused be not within
ten miles of the place of meeting of the lodge, an attested
copy of the charges, enclosed by mail to the post-office near-
est his residence, thirty days before the trial, shall be deemed
good notice. If his residence be out of the state, and known,
the notice shall be sent at least sixty days before the day of
trial. If his residence be unknown, the trial may be had, ex
•parte. — Const. Ala.

The above is also the rule in Missouri and Kansas, except
that the time of notice is twenty, instead of " thirty " days.

The Master shall submit the charges to a committee of
three, to be by him appointed, who shall investigate the mat-
ter. * * * When the committee report a trial neces-
sary, the Secretary of the lodge shall serve upon the accused
a copy of the charges, the names of the witnesses, and sum-
mon him to appear and answer, in writing, within ten days.
* * * After the expiration of ten days, whether the ac-
cused has answered or not, the lodge shall fix a time for the
trial, and summon all the members of the lodge, the party ac-
cused, and all the witnesses who are masons, to appear at the

340 MASONIC TRIALS — OP A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES.

time appointed ; and should there be witnesses who cannot
attend the lodge, the Master shall appoint a committee of
three to take the testimony of such witnesses. This commit-
tee shall give due notice to the accused of the time and place
of taking such testimony ; shall reduce the same to writing,
and cause it to be affirmed to by the party giving it. —
Const. La.

It is the duty of the Secretary to furnish the accused
brother with a copy of the charges against him, if of a nature
to be reduced to writing, at least ten days previous to the
trial, with notice of the time and place of trial. — Consts. Ohio
and Ind.

The constitutional regulation of Wisconsin, is the same as
that of Massachusetts, except, in place of " fifty " miles, read
"fifteen" miles.

A copy of the charges, made out by the Secretary, together
with a summons, stating the time of trial, shall be served at
the usual place of abode, at least ten days previous to the day
appointed for trial. — Const. Min.

The Secretary, under the direction of the Master, shall
serve, or cause the accused to be served, with an attested
copy of the charge, and a citation stating the time and place
appointed for his trial. If the residence of the accused is
known, and within thirty miles of the place where the lodge
is located, he shall be entitled to a personal service, ten days
before trial. If his residence be at a greater distance than
thirty miles, but within the state, a summons to appear and
answer, forwarded to him by mail, or otherwise, twenty
days before the trial, shall be considered sufficient. If his
residence be out of the state, and known, and more than
thirty miles distant, then the summons shall be issued thirty
days before trial. If his residence be unknown, the lodge
shall proceed, ex parte, and conduct the proceedings to a final
determination ; and like proceedings shall be had when he
neglects or refuses to obey the summons. In all instances
where offenses are committed while the lodge is at labor, the
rules requiring notice and delay may be dispensed with, and

MASONIC TRIALS — OP A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES. 341

the Master authorized to order the offending brother to show
cause, instanter, why he shall not be promptly dealt with. — ■
Const. Iowa.

The Secretary of the lodge shall have a copy of the charges
duly delivered to the accused, as also a notice, which shall
give a reasonable time for the taking of proof to sustain the
charges and specifications; also, to inform the accused that
he may, at the same time and place, offer proof to exculpate
himself from such charges ; and that the accused may also
have leave to take proof at such other time and place as he
may designate, upon giving reasonable notice to the Master,
or presiding officer of said lodge ; and for which purpose the
lodge shall allow a reasonable time, if asked for. * * * If
any mason be guilty of any gross unmasonic conduct, and ab-
sconds, so that notice cannot be served upon him, charges
may be preferred against him, which shall lie over three
months ; and if the Secretary shall report that he cannot serve
notice upon him, he shall enter a denial of the charges upon
the record, and some brother shall be appointed to defend
him, and proof may be taken, and the case tried as if he were
present. — Chnst. Ky.

Such brother shall be duly notified, and furnished, in
writing, with a copy of the charges against him. * * *
Due notice shall be given, as far as practicable, to all the
members of the lodge, of the time and objects of said meet-
ing.— Reg. Tenn.

If the committee report that the accused should be put
upon trial, the Secretary shall forthwith furnish the accused
with a copy of the charges and specifications, and report of
committee thereupon, and notify him that at the next stated
meeting after service of notice, (providing he shall have had
twenty days' notice,) he Avill be put upon his trial. If the ac-
cused shall evade notice, or if the Secretary, after four
months, be unable to ascertain the residence of the accused,
so as to notify him, the lodge may proceed to trial, as if ho
had been regularly notified. — Const. Ark.

342 MASONIC TRIALS — OF A BROTHER UNDER CBARGE8.

In California, the rule is almost verbatim with that of
Massachusetts, except, that accused must be notified, at least
ten days before the time appointed for examination ; or, ii his
residence be out of the state, and known, summons must be
sent him, at least four months previous to the time appointed
for his examination.

A copy of the complaint or charges shall be served upon
the accused, at least ten days before he is arraigned for trial.
— Const. Oregon.

A copy thereof shall be served upon the accused, except
such as are publicly made and known. — Const. Md.

The Secretary shall furnish the accused with a copy of the
charges, if of a nature to be reduced to writing, at least ten
days previous to the trial, with notice of the time and place
of. trial. — Const. Neb.

The regulation of California is the same as that of Massa-
chusetts, except, for "fourteen" days, read ten, and for
"sixty days," read four months.

The accused is entitled to a copy of the charges against
him, and must have reasonable notice of the time and place
appointed for his trial. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 322.

3. Examination. — The examination of the charges shall be
had in a lodge specially notified and convened for that pur-
pose, at which none but members of the lodge, or of the
Grand Lodge, shall be admitted, except as counsel or wit-
nesses.— Const. Me.

The examination of the charges shall be had in a lodge
specially notified and convened for that purpose, at which no
visitors shall be admitted, except as counsel or witnesses. —
Consts. Vt., Mass., Wis., Mo., CaL, and R. I.

The Master of the lodge shall appoint a committee, of not
leas than three, to conduct the examination, which shall be
either at a special communication, called for that purpose, or
uie time which may be appointed for the first meeting of the
committee. — Const. D. C.

MASONIC TRIALS OF A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES. 343

Should the accused fail to attend, the trial may proceed,
ex parte. Every facility shall be allowed the accused for his
defense. — Const. N. C.

The trial shall commence at a regular communication of the
lodge, but may be continued at special communications con-
vened for that purpose. The lodge shall be opened in the
highest degree to which the accused has attained, and the
examinations take place in the presence of the accused and
the accuser, if they desire it; but the final decision shall
always be made in the third degree. No visitors shall be
admitted on such occasions. — Const. S. C.

The examination of the charges shall be in a lodge specially
notified for that purpose, at which no visitors shall be admit-
ted, except witnesses and counsel; provided, said witnesses
and counsel are master masons. — Const. Ala.

At the hour fixed upon, the trial shall commence, and after
the charges shall have been read, and all the testimony heard,
the accused shall be allowed to speak in his defense, or avail
himself of the assistance of some brother to speak for him ,
he shall then retire. Whenever the accused cannot be
found, or fails to answer or appear, the Master shall appoint
some brother to appear for him. Should any brother be con-
victed during his absence, and without having been notified
of the charges preferred against him, he shall, on his return,
and demanding it, have a new trial granted him. — Const. La.

When a brother, charged as aforesaid, shall abscond, pro-
ceedings may be had in his absence, without notice. — Consts.
Ohio and hid.

The accused shall be permitted to engage a brother master
mason to defend him, to answer the complaint, produce and
cross-examine witnesses, obtain a reasonable delay, by show-
ing a sufficient cause for the same, and either by himself or
counsel, address the lodge, after the closing of the testimony ;
but never shall offensive allusions to, or insinuations against,
the lodge or a brother be permitted ; and the Master shall
order the brother, so offending, to leave the lodge, and tita

344 MASONIC TRTAT.S — OF A BEOTHEE UNDEE CHABGES.

Senior Warden may bring charges against such brother foi
unmasonic conduct. If the Master be called to appear as a
witness, the Senior Warden shall preside during his examin-
ation. No visiting brother, unless a witness, or as counsel
for the accused, shall be admitted to the lodge, while the trial
is in progress. No lodge shall proceed to trial, unless a ma-
jority of the members of such lodge be present; but the
Master may issue his summons, and call off, from day to day,
until the required number appear. — Const. Min.

All trials (except for offenses committed in open lodge,)
shall be had in a lodge specially notified and convened for the
purpose, at which no visitor shaU be admitted, except as
counsel or witness. The accused may select any brother for
his counsel. The lodge shall be opened in the highest degree
to which the accused has attained, until the testimony has
been concluded, and the accused heard by himself or his
counsel, in his defense, when the accused and the accuser
(unless the charge be preferred by the Junior Warden, in his
official capacity) shall retire, and the lodge be opened in the
third degree. — Reg. Iowa.

When the lodge shall be prepared for trial, such of the
charges as have been approved by the committee of investi-
gation shall be read. The testimony on the part of the pros-
ecution shall then be produced, all of which testimony, except
so much thereof as may be in writing and filed, shall be taken
down in writing by the Secretary. The accused will then be
permitted to introduce his testimony, which shall also be re-
duced to writing, with the exception of such written testimony
as may be filed. When the evidence is closed, the prosecu-
tor, or any member he may select in his behalf, may be allowed
to comment upon the evidence. The accused, or any mem-
ber he may desire to represent him, (or in absence of accused,
pome member appointed by the Master,) may be heard in
reply. — Const. Ark.

The testimony of uninitiated witnesses may be taken in the
ante-room, before a committee, or in any other convenient
place, — C. W. Mooee.

MASONIC TRIALS OF A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES. 345

"When all the parties shall have been summoned to attend
thereon, and the case shall have been investigated, such
order and adjudication may be made as shall be authorized
by the laws and regulations of Masonry. — Const. Md.

It is the right of the accused, on all trials, to be present at
the time the testimony of witnesses is given against him;
and no commissioners can refuse it without the violation of
a rule of masonic jurisprudence. — Res. N. Y., 1856.

The lodge should be opened in the highest degree to which
the accused has attained ;* the accused and accuser should
be present, (if the latter be a mason,) and also be present at
all examinations of witnesses. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 323.

4. Testimony.— The accused may select any brother fcr his
counsel, and the witnesses shall testify, if masons, on their
honor as such. Hearsay evidence shall be excluded. — Consts.
Me., Vt., Mass., R. L, Wis., Mo., Cat, and Kansas.

The Committee of Investigation shall propound to the wit-
nesses on both sides, all questions which may be deemed
necessary, by either party, or by themselves ; these questions
must be written, and the replies are to be reduced to writing ;
and upon the termination of the examination of each witness,
the testimony, as written down, shall be read to him, and if
correct, he shall attest the same with his signature. When
the investigation is conducted before the lodge, any member
present may propound questions to the witness under exam-
ination, provided such questions are presented to the Master
and deemed by him proper. The examination of any wit-
nesses, not masons, shall be conducted by the committee, the
said witnesses having first taken an oath before some legally
authorized person, to make true answers to such questions as
may be propounded to them, all parties being duly advised
of the time and place when and where such examination is to
be had. The accused is entitled to appear before the lodge
in person, or by counsel, (the latter being a master mason,)
during the examination of his case, and when the testimony

* But the doclsion should be had in a master mason's lodge.

15*

346 MASONIC TRIALS — OP A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES.

is all closed, shall be heard in his defense. After the deliv-
ery of his defense, and during the subsequent proceedings of
the lodge, the accused is to withdraw. — Const. D. C.

Any evidence, allowable in a court, may be taken on honor.
—Const. N. C.

The evidence of profanes, or brethren of an inferior de-
gree, must be taken by a committee, and reported to the
lodg^e. The accused and the accuser shall have a right to be
present at said examinations. The evidence of all master
masons must be taken on their honor as master masons.
That of others, in such manner as shall be agreed on by the
parties. — Const. S. C.

The accused may also have leave to take testimony at such
other reasonable times and places as he may designate, giv-
ing proper notice to the Master, or Secretary; and, in all
cases, the whole of the testimony, proper to be written, shall
be taken in writing. — Const. Flu.

It shall be the duty of the lodge, to hear any evidence rel-
evant to the charge, and commit the same to writing, if
proper to do so, when it shall be heard in open lodge ; or
evidence of persons, not masons, may be taken out of the
lodge, before any person authorized by the laws of the state
to administer oaths to witnesses, notice having been given to
the adverse party, so as to allow one day to every thirty miles'
travel, from the place where said notice is served to the place
of taking such testimony ; and a written notice left with the
Master or Secretary of the lodge, shall be sufficient to author-
ize the taking of testimony on the part of the accused. The
depositions shall be sealed up by the person taking them, and
conveyed by some trustworthy person, or by mail, and de-
livered to the Secretary of the lodge, who shall endorse
thereon whether received, sealed, or otherwise. Upon every
trial, the Secretary of the lodge shall write down, in a fair hand,
the whole of the evidence in the case, proper to be written. —
Const. Ala.

It is the privilege of the accused to take any proof or testi.

MASONIC TRIALS OF A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES. 341

inony to be heard in evidence, that he may desire, upon giv-
ing three days' notice to the Master of the lodge ; and in all
cases, when the hearing comes on, the whole of the testimony
shall be reduced to writing, and be carefully preserved by the
Secretary of the lodge. — Const*. Ohio and Ind.

All masonic testimony shall be given in open lodge, at the
time of the trial, and a mason shall testify, upon his honor, as
such. The testimony of an E. A. or F. C. shall be taken in a
lodge corresponding with the rank held by the witness ; when,
after receiving such testimony, the inferior lodge shall be
closed, and a lodge of master masons re-opened. At the re-
quest of either party, the master shall appoint a committee
of at least three master masons, members of the lodge, em-
powering them to take such profane or legal testimony as
may be brought before them ; and such testimony shall be in
the form of an affidavit, sworn to or affirmed, before a legally
qualified justice of the peace. And the committee shall give
due notice, to both parties, of the time and place of taking
such testimony. — Const. Min.

All testimony shall be given in open lodge, at the time of
trial, or before a committee specially appointed for the pur-
pose ; and, in either case, the accused, and the accuser, if he
be a mason, shall be entitled to be present, and propose such
relevant questions as they may desire. The testimony shall
be reduced to writing, and when taken before a committee,
reported in full to the lodge. And if given by a mason, shall
be upon his honor ; if by a profane, upon his oath, duly ad-
ministered by any officer competent under the law. If the
testimony be before the lodge, and by a profane, then, in that
case, the lodge shall be called from labor during his introduc-
tion.— Const. Iowa.

In all cases, the whole of the testimony shall be reduced to
writing, (if not improper to be written,) and shall be caiefully
preserved by the Secretary of the lodge. — Const. Ky.

The best evidence shall be introduced. If the witnesses
cannot, or will not, attend at the lodge, their depositions may

348 MASONIC TRIALS — OF A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES,

be taken, and read as evidence. Notice of the time and
place of taking depositions shall be given, in writing, to the
opposite party, a reasonable time previous to the time of tak-
ing the same, and the deponent shall make his testimony, up<»n
his honor. Depositions shall be reduced to writing v*y the
Secretary, or by some brother appointed by the Master for
that purpose, and sealed up in the presence of the deponent.
Notice to a lodge to take the depositions of witnesses may be
made, by delivering a written notice to the Secretary or
Master of the lodge, as above provided. The lodge shall ap-
point some brother, who shall reduce to writing the whole
evidence in the case. — Reg. Mo. and Kansas.

It is the privilege of the accused to take any proof or testi-
mony to be heard in evidence, that he may desire, upon giv-
ing three days' notice to the Master of the lodge ; and, in all
cases, when the hearing comes on, the whole of the testimony
shall be reduced to writing, and be carefully preserved by
the Secretary of the lodge. — Const. Neb.

A companion cannot be compelled to give testimony which
may criminate himself. — G. Chap. Mich., 1854.

An accused par+y on trial cannot be allowed to testify in
his own case. — Swigeet, G. M. Ky., 1858.

All persons are admissible witnesses, who have the use of
their reason, and such religious belief, as to feel the obliga-
tions of an oath, who have not been convicted of any infa-
mous crime, and who are not influenced by interest. — Justice
Lawrence.

The testimony of a person who is not a mason, is generally
admissible. Such testimony is always to be taken by a com-
mittee, and on oath administered by a competent legal officer.
— Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 328.

Any testimony that would convict a mason of immoral con-
duct, is lawful testimony. — Morris, Am. F. M.,y., 100.

The accuser may be a witness ; but the accused cannot.—
Fenton, G. M. Mich., 1859

MASONIC TRIALS OP A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES. 349

5. Judgment. — The question : " Is the accused guilty, or not
guilty ?" shall be distinctly put to each member of the lodge,
by name, commencing with the youngest. The Secretary
shall record the answer as given. — Const. Me.

To the above, the Constitutions of Massachusetts, Wiscon-
sin, Rhode Island, and California, add : " the answer shall
be given standing, and in a distinct and audible voice."

Upon the termination of the deliberation on the evidence,
the following question shall be propounded to each member,
beginning with the youngest : " Is he guilty, or not guilty ?"
and the response shall be, "Guilty," or "Not guilty," accord-
ing to the judgment of the member, the Secretary propound-
ing the question, and recording the reply. — Const. D. C.

"When the case is closed, the sense of the lodge shall be
taken, through the ballot box. If guilty, the penalty shall be
determined in like ma oner. — Const. N. C.

When the trial is concluded, the accused and accuser shall
retire, and the Master shall put the question of " guilty, or not
guilty," to the lodge. The question shall be decided by bal-
lot, and if two-thirds of the balls are black, the accused shall
be declared guilty. Every member present is bound to vote,
unless excused by unanimous permission. — Const. S. C

When the testimony is closed, the question upon each spe-
cification shall be distinctly put by the Master to every mem-
ber present, beginning with the youngest, " Is the accused
guilty, or not guilty?" The answer shall be given standing,
and in an audible manner, and the Secretary shall record the
answer. — Cojists. Ala., Mo., and Kansas.

After the testimony is heard, and the brother heard' in his
defense, he shall then retire, and the lodge shall proceed at
once, and without debate, to ballot on the guilt or innocence
of the accused, taking a separate ballot on each specific
charge. — Const. La.

An accused brother should be judged according to the
evidence; but, since no brother can pronounce judgment,
upon his honor, contrary to his conviction, it becomes the

350 MASONIC TRIALS— OF A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES.

duty of every one, although perhaps not called upon, to lay
before the lodge such facts in regard to the case under con-
sideration, as he may be cognizant of; but such testimony
shall be given in the presence of the accused. Any brother
failing to make known any facts pertinent to the question be-
fore the lodge, while sitting in judgment on a case, is amena-
ble to all the penalties of masonic discipline. In pronounc-
ing upon the guilt or innocence of the accused, the roll of the
lodge shall be called ; beginning with the youngest brother,
and ending with the Master ; and every brother, as his name
is called, shall rise, Salute the Master, and pronounce his
judgment, using the following form : " Upon the honor of a

mason, I pronounce Brother guilty (or, not guilty) of

unmasonic conduct." The accused cannot vote on his own
case ; but no other member of the lodge present can be ex-
cused from voting. In no case can the accused be present
when judgment is pronounced ; and neither counsel or wit-
nesses, unless members of the lodge, shall remain within
during the voting. — Const Min.

After proper deliberation, the question, "Is the accused
guilty, or not guilty ?" shall be distinctly put by the Chair to
each member of the lodge, by name, commencing with the
youngest mason, who shall answer either " guilty " or " not
guilty." If there be several charges, the vote shall be taken
separately upon each, and the Secretary shall record the re-
sult thereof, which shall be the decision of the lodge. — Const.
Iowa.

After the comments upon the evidence are closed, the ac-
cused shall withdraw from the lodge-room. A vote shall then
be taken upon each specification under each charge, and upon
each charge in their order, the prosecutor not being permit-
ted to vote. If any charge shall be sustained, the lodge shall
proceed to vote (the prosecutor excluded) upon the infliction
of punishment. The highest order of punishment shall first
be proposed; if that be not sustained, then the next milder
punishment, until the grade be fixed. The accused shall
then be admitted, and informed of the result. — Const. Ark.

MASONIC TRIALS — OF A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES. 351

The question, " Is the accused guilty, or not guilty?" shall
bo distinctly put to each member of the lodge, and the vote
thereon shall be by ballot. — Reg. Cat.

It is proper that all matters in mitigation of punishment,
should be heard after the verdict. — C. W. Moore.

"When the trial is concluded, the accused and the accuser
should retire, and the presiding officer must then put the
question of " guilty, or not guilty." If there are several
charges, or specifications, the question must be taken on each
separately. It seems generally conceded that this question
should be decided by ballot. Every member present is bound
to vote, unless excused by unanimous consent. — Mackey,
U. M. £., xvii., 324.

6. Punishment. — If the verdict be suspension or expulsion,
an attested copy of the proceedings shall be sent to the
Grand Lodge, at the next ensuing meeting thereof, for exam-
ination, and final action. A sentence of suspension or expul-
sion shall not take effect until confirmed by this Grand Lodge ;
but shall operate as a suspension of the delinquent in the
meantime. — Consts. Me., Mass., Wis., and CaL*

A majority of the members present shall be sufficient to
suspend a member ; two-thirds of those present shall be ne-
cessary to expel. A judgment of suspension is immediately
operative, and continues at the pleasure of the lodge, unless
set aside upon an appeal to the Grand Lodge. A judgment
of expulsion only operates as a suspension, until confirmed by
the Grand Lodge. — Const. D. C.

Every lodge has the power to arraign its members, or any
other mason within its jurisdiction, on a charge of immoral or
unmasonic conduct ; and, after due investigation, may proceed
to pass such lawful sentence as the aggravation of the case
shall warrant. — Const. N. C.

If the verdict be guilty, the Worshipful Master shall then
put the question as to the punishment, beginning with expul-

• Except, hat a copy of proceedings is not required in cases of itispension.

352 MASONIC TRIALS — OF A BROTHER UNDER CHARGES.

sion, and going on, if necessary, to indefinite suspension, de-
finite suspension, and public and private reprimand. — Cov^t.
S. C.

Should such brother fail to attend the summons of the lodge,
or of a committee appointed to examine into his conduct,
without sufficient reason therefor, on such failure being re-
ported, it shall be the duty of the lodge to suspend him from
all the benefits of Masonry, until he comes forward, and an-
swers to the charges against him. — Const. Ga.

If found guilty, the ballot shall then be taken in the follow
ing order on the different degrees of punishment : 1st. expul
sion ; 2d. indefinite suspension ; 3d. suspension for a fixed
period of time, taking the ballot first on the longest period
proposed; and 4th., reproof or reprimand. — Const. La,

In case the lodge shall find the accused guilty of the
charges preferred against him, they shall proceed to pro-
nounce -sentence of suspension or expulsion, as the nature of
the offense may require. — Const. Wis.

After a brother has been found guilty, the next question
shall be that of punishment, beginning with the greatest, and
on this question the ballot may be used. Suspension is only
inflicted when the offense is against some temporary regula-
tion of the fraternity; expulsion follows a gross violation
of the moral law, or the fundamental principles of Masonry,
or attempts against any part of the frame-work of its govern-
ment.— Const. Min.

If a majority of the members vote him guilty, then the
question shall be taken by ballot, as to the amount and nature
of the punishment to be inflicted, beginning with the highest
penalty. Every member present is bound to vote, and two-
thirds of the whole number cast shall be necessary to inflict
the penalty. "When the nature of the punishment has been
determined, the accused and the accuser, if a mason, shall be
ordered to return, and the sentence communicated to the for-
mer by the presiding officer. — Const. Iowa.

From and after the time a member of a subordinate lodge

MASONIC TRIALS — RIGHT OF APPEAL FROM SENTENCE. 353

shall be deemed worthy of expulsion from the privileges of the
order, the brother so charged by his lodge, shall stand as a
suspended mason, until the Grand Lodge shall take action in
the premises, as provided for by its Constitution. — Res. Ga.,
1856.

If the verdict is " guilty," the presiding officer must put the
question as to the nature and amount of punishment. He
will commence with expulsion, and, if necessary, proceed to
propose indefinite, and then, definite suspension, exclusion,
public or private reprimand, and censure. — Mackey, U. M. L.y
xvii., 324.

The Right of Appeal from Sentence.

Any brother, aggrieved at the decision of a subordinate
lodge, has the right of appeal to the Grand Lodge. This is
an inalienable right.

If any complaint be brought, the brother found guilty shall
stand tc the award and determination of the lodge, who are
the proper and competent judges of all such controversies,
(unless you carry it by appeal to the Grand Lodge,) and to
whom they ought to be referred. — Ancient Charges 1720, vi.

And if any 01 them do you injury, you must apply to your
own or his lodge ; and from thence you may appeal to the
Grand Lodge at the Quarterly Communication, and from
thence to the Annual Grand Lodge, as has been the ancient
laudable conduct of our forefathers, in every nation. — lb.,
vi., 7.

Any brother who may feel aggrieved by the decision of
any lodge, or other masonic authority, in this jurisdiction,
may appeal therefrom to the Grand Lodge, which appeal
shall be in writing, specifying particularly the grievance com-
plained of. — Const. Vt.

Any brother who may feel aggrieved by the decision of
any lodge, or other masonic authority, acting under this juris-
diction, may appeal to the Grand Lodge against such de-
cision.— Const. M<iss.

354 MASONIC TRIALS — RIGHT OP APPEAL FROM SENTENCE.

An appeal lies to the Grand Lodge, by any person* ag-
grieved by the proceedings of a subordinate lodge. — Const.
Penn.

A brother feeling himself aggrieved by the decision of a
subordinate lodge, shall have the right of an appeal to the
Grand Lodge, he having given due and timely notice to the
subordinate lodge of his intention so to appeal from its
decision; and the Secretary of said lodge, if required, shall
furnish him with a copy of all the proceedings touching his
c-ase. — Const. N. C.

Every private lodge, as well as every brother, has the right
of appeal to the Grand Lodge, whose decision is final. —
Const. S. C.

Any member of the order feeling himself aggrieved by the
result of any trial or investigation, as herein provided, may
appeal to the Grand Lodge. — Const. Ga.

It shall be the privilege of any brother mason, feeling him
self aggrieved by the decision of any subordinate lodge, to
take an appeal to the next annual communication of the
Grand Lodge. — Const. Fla.

When any brother shall have been convicted, and sen-
tenced, he shall, upon giving notice in writing, be allowed an
appeal to the Grand Lodge. — Const. La.

Any brother feeling himself aggrieved by the decision of
any such lodge, shall be permitted to appeal to the next
Grand Lodge. — Const. Ky.

The accused, or any master mason, member of a lodge,
under this jurisdiction, feeling aggrieved by the decision of
the lodge upon the trial of any brother, may take his appeal
from the judgment and decision to the Grand Lodge. — Const.
Mo. and Kansas.

Any member who shall deem himself, or the. cause of

* The next section prohibits an appeal from a rejected applicant for the de-
grees, unless such appeal be recommended by the lodge in which the rejection
took place.—G. W. C.

MASONIC TRIALS — RIGHT OF APPEAL FROM SENTENCE. 355

Masonry injured, by the decision of his lodge, in any trial,
may appeal therefrom to the Grand Lodge. — Const. Ark.

In all cases of suspension or expulsion by a subordinate
lodge, the right of appeal lies to the Grand Lodge. — Consts.
Cal. and Oregon.

Any lodge, or brother, who may feel aggrieved by the
decision of any other masonic authority or jurisdiction, may
appeal to the Grand Lodge against such decision. — Const.
Canada.

In all cases where a brother may consider himself aggrieved
by the decision of a subordinate lodge, he has the right of
appeal to the District Deputy Grand Master of the District in
which such lodge may be holden.* — Const. Va.

Any brother feeling himself aggrieved by the decision of
the subordinate lodge against him, may, at any time, within
one year thereafter, take an appeal to the Grand Lodge. —
Consts. Ohio and lnd.

Any brother deeming himself aggrieved by the decision of
his lodge, may appeal, in writing, to the Grand Lodge. — Const.

Mich.

Every mason under sentence of suspension or expulsion,
has the right to appeal to the Grand Lodge from the convic-
tion and the sentence, * * * when the Secretary shall send
up an attested copy of the proceedings,! including the testi-
mony.— Const. Iowa.

No new testimony shall be heard on the appeal. — Reg.
Tenn.

A member can appeal to Grand Lodge only on matters af-
fecting his personal standing and relations as a mason. —
C. W. Moore, 1850.

* If the decision of a committee appointed by the D. D. G. M. is not satisfac-
tory, either party has the right of a final appeal to the Grand Lodge, upon tht
record.— G. W. C.

t Nearly every Grand Lodge Constitution requires Secretaries, in cases of ap-
peal, to send up a copy of all the proceedings in the case.— -G. W. C.

356 MASONIC TRIALS— BIGHT OF APPEAL FROM SENTENOE.

The Grand Lodge has appellate, not original, jurisdiction in
the proceedings instituted by its subordinates against delin-
quent members. It can take cognizance of such cases only
when brought before it by appeal, or submitted for confirma-
tion.—C. W. Moore, 1850.

The right of appeal to the Grand Lodge, from the decision
of the subordinate lodge, in cases of discipline, is guaranteed
to every mason, by the ancient usages and laws of the frater-
nity ; and this right supposes the existence of a power in the
Grand Lodge to confirm, modify, or reverse the decision of
the subordinate. — C. W. Moore, 1851.

Any lodge or brother aggrieved hj the decision of any
other masonic authority or jurisdiction, may appeal to the
next practicable Grand Lodge against such decision. ' At the
hearing of the appeal, no fresh evidence shall be adduced by
either party. — Const. Eng.

Any brother thinking himself aggrieved by the sentence
of a lodge, may appeal, &c. — Const. Scot.

Any member of a lodge has the right of appeal from its de-
cision in any trial, irrespective of the nature of that decision.
— Hillyer, G. M. Miss., 1855.

The Grand Lodge, on the receipt of the appeal and evi-
dence, shall be possessed of the cause, and shall proceed to
try and examine the cause, upon the evidence so transmitted,
without any other testimony, and decide the matter finally. —
Consts. Mo. and Kansas.

If a brother is tried by his lodge, and is acquitted, the com-
plainant may appeal. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

Every mason, who has been tried and convicted by a lodge,
has an inalienable right to appeal from that conviction, and
accompanying sentence, to the Grand Lodge. During the
pendency of an appeal, the sentence of the subordinate lodge
is held in abeyance, and cannot be enforced. The appellant
in this case remains in the position of a mason under charges.
It is competent for the Grand Lodge, on an appeal, to aug
ment, reduce, or wholly abrogate the penalty inflicted by its

MASONIC TRIALS — HOW TAKEN. 357

subordinate. If it confirm the verdict, the appeal is dis-
missed, and the sentence goes into immediate operation, "with-
out further proceedings. If it reduce or augment the pen-
alty, the original sentence becomes void, and the sentence of
the Grand Lodge is to be put in force. If it refer the case
back for a new trial, the proceedings on the trial will be com-
menced de novo. If it refer the case back for further consid-
eration, on the ground of inadequate punishment, the trial is
not repeated, but the discussion on the nature of the penalty
is reviewed, and new evidence may be received. — Mackey,
U. M. L., xxii., 339.

How Taken.

Only a part of our Grand Constitutions prescribe the course
to be pursued in appealing from a subordinate lodge to the
Grand Lodge. In the absence of special enactment, it may
be considered necessary and proper, 1st. that the party in-
tending to appeal should notify the opposite party, in writing,
of such intention ; 2d. that a copy of all previous proceedings
in the case, attested by the Secretary, be sent up to the
Grand Lodge ; and 3d. that fie appellant, through the Grand
Secretary, address a written petition to the Grand Lodge, set-
ting forth fully and distinctly the grounds of his appeal.

Though the right of the Grand Lodge to re-open and re-try
the case, is pretty generally claimed, yet the usual course is,
for it, through a committee, to review the record, and affirm,
set aside, or amend, the decision of the subordinate, upon the
record.

Which appeal shall be in writing, specifying particularly
the grievance complained of, and shall be, by the appellant,
sent by mail to the Grand Secretary. — Consts. Vermont and
Mass.*

All appeals to the Grand Lodge, from the decision of a sub-
ordinate lodge, shall be made in writing, and left with the

* This Grand Constitution adds to the above : " A notice and copy of the ap-
peal must also, and at the same time, be sent by tho appellant to the party
against whose decision the appeal is made."

358 MASONIC TRIALS— HOW TAKEN.

Grand Secretary, and the appellant shall give the other party
one month's notice thereof. — Consts. Conn, and III.

In New York, the appellant must give notice of his appeal
to the commissioners, and also to the opposing party. The
notice to the latter must be within thirty days after notice of
the decision.

All such appeals shall be made in writing, and filed with
the Grand Secretary. The appellant is required to give notice
thereof to the appellee, at least ten days, if within three miles
of the place of meeting of the Grand Lodge, and twenty days,
if beyond that distance, before proceedings shall be had
thereon. — Const. Penn.

When any brother appeals from the decision of his lodge,
he shall lodge a copy thereof with the District Deputy Grand
Master. * * * When any lodge or brother appeals from
a decision of said committee * they shall lodge a copy thereof
with the Grand Secretary. — Const. Va.

-Appeals brought up to the Grand Lodge, will not be con-
sidered, unless the same be in writing, accompanied with all
necessary papers, proceedings, and proofs, when consistent,
to enable the formation of a correct decision. A brother ap-
pealing to Grand Lodge, shall give due and timely notice to
the subordinate lodge of his intention so to appeal from its
decision, and the Secretary of said lodge, if required, shall
furnish him with a copy of all the proceedings touching his
case. — Const. N. C.

In Florida, the appellant must notify the lodge of his ap-
peal, and also the Grand Secretary.

The appeal shall be in writing, and in the following form :

"I, , a master mason, under the jurisdiction of the

Grand Lodge of Alabama, do declare that I feel materially

aggrieved by the decision of Lodge, No , in the case

of ; and for rehearing of the case , and to the end that

justice maybe done in that matter, do take my appeal to saifi

* The committee appointed by the D. D. G. M.

MASONIC TRIALS — HOW TAKEN. 359

Grand Lodge." The above form shall be signed b y the appel-
lant, attested by the Secretary, md under the seal of tho
lodge. The Secretary shall immediately record the appeal,
and transmit to the Grand Lodge, at the next meeting thereof,
a true copy of the evidence in the cause, together with the
appeal, certified under his hand, and seal of the lodge. The
Grand Lodge, on the receipt of the appeal and evidence, shall
proceed to examine and try the cause, upon the evidence so
transmitted, without any other testimony, and decide the
matter finally. The appellant shall give the other party at
least ten days' notice, in writing, of the taking of the appeal, a
copy of which notice shall be forwarded to the Grand Lodge
with the evidence of its service. — Const. Ala.

The regulation of Missouri is, in substance, and nearly ver-
batim, as above, except, that the notice for appeal must state
the reasons for such appeal.

The appeal must be made in writing, specifying the partic-
ular grievance complained of, and be transmitted to the
Grand Secretary. A notice and copy of the appeal must also
be sent by the appellant to the party against whose decision
the appeal is made. — Const. Ca.

On application of the appellant, the Secretary shall make
out, and forward to the Grand Secretary, a certified copy of
the proceedings had in his case, with the original testimony,
so far as the same may have been reduced to writing. The
subordinate lodge, or the appellant brother, shall have the
benefit of any additional testimony, provided the same has
been taken agreeably to the notice prescribed in the rules and
regulations of the Grand Lodge. — Consts. Ohio and Ind.

In Michigan, the appeal must be in writing ; and, on appli-
cation of appellant, the Secretary shall make out, and forward
to the Grand Secretary, a certified copy of the proceedings
had in his case, with the original testimony, so far as the
same shall have been reduced to writing.

In Iowa, if an appeal be taken, the Secretary shall send up
an attested copy of the proceedings, including the testimony.

360 MASONIC TRIALS — HOW TAKEN.

In Arkansas, a written notice of desire to appeal to Grand
Lodge, (settin ; forth his objections to the action of the lodge,
and a list of such papers as he may require, should be for-
warded to Grand Lodge,) must be filed with the Master of the
lodge. The Master shall thereupon grant the appeal, and
send up, directed to the Grand Secretary, a copy of the record
of the trial, signed by the Master, and certified by the Secre-
tary, under seal of the lodge, which shall contain a copy of the
original charges and specifications, report of committee of in-
vestigation, copy of all testimony committed to writing at the
time of trial, of all papers used upon the trial, of the appel-
lant's notice r f appeal, and of all papers he may desire to be
forwarded to Grand Lodge. The Secretary must certify that
the record contains all original papers, or true copies, and a
true transcript of all the testimony introduced on the trial,
and append a descriptive list of all the papers sent up.

When any brother shall have been convicted, and sen-
tenced, he shall, on giving notice, in writing, be allowed an
appeal to the Grand Lodge ; whereupon the lodge shall for-
ward to the Grand Secretary a full and attested copy of all
the proceedings, documents, and testimony, in the case. —
Const. La.

As an appeal always supposes the necessity of a review of
the whole case, the lodge is bound to furnish the Grand Lodge
with an attested copy of its proceedings on the trial, and such
other testimony, in its possession, as the appellant may deem
necessary for his defense. — Mackey, IT. M. L., xvii., 339.

It shall be the duty of the Master of every lodge, in all
cases of appeal, forthwith to cause a copy of such proceed-
ings to be forwarded to the Grand Secretary. — Const. Va.

In all cases of appeal to Grand Lodge, from the decision of
a subordinate lodge, it shall be the duty of the Secretary to
make out, and forward to the Secretary of the Grand Lodge, a
full and complete transcript of the records and proceedings
had in such cases, embracing the charges and specifications,
and the testimony taken on the case, with a note, on the
records, of the names of the witnesses. — Const. Fla.

MASONIC TRIALS — WHEN TAKEN. 361

When Taken.

In the following Grand Lodge Constitutions, n> definite pe-
riod is fixed in which an appeal to Grand Lodge must be taken :
Rhode Island, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Louisiana, Missouri. Arkansas, California, Oregon, Canada,
Pennsylvania, Michigan, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Maine, New
Hampshire.

In Missouri and Kansas, an appeal to Grand Lodge must
be filed with the Secretary of the lodge, within ten days after
the trial and judgment, and not afterwards.

In Iowa, the appeal must be taken at least thirty days be-
fore the next succeeding session of the Grand Lodge, (when
that time intervenes.)

In Ohio, Indiana, and Nebraska, one year is allowed in
which to take an appeal to Grand Lodge.

In Kentucky, an appeal is only allowed to the next Grand
Lodge, after sentence.

In Georgia, the appeal must be taken before two commu-
nications of Grand Lodge be passed, after sentence.

In Vermont, Florida, and California, the appeal must be
taken to the next Annual Communication of Grand Lodge.

In Massachusetts, notice of appeal must be transmitted to
the Grand Secretary, at least ten days before next communi-
cation of Grand Lodge.

In Arkansas, notice of appeal must be filed with the Mas-
ter, within six months after the date of the trial.

In New York, Maryland, Mississippi, and Minnesota, an
appeal must be taken within six months after sentence.

In Illinois and Connecticut the appellant must give the
lodge one month's notice of his intention to appeal.

In Alabama, an appeal must be taken wTithin sixty days
after sentence.

In the District of Columbia, an appeal can only be taken
within ten days after judgment

In Scotland, an appeal may be taken on or before second
quarterly communication after sentence.
16

RESTORATION.

As a subordinate lodge cannot expel from the rights and
privileges of Masonry, without the concurrence of the Grand
Lodge ; it follows, that they cannot restore to such rights
and privileges, without such consent.

It seems to be the nearly unanimous opinion, and universal
usage, that a Grand Lodge cannot, in any case, nor under any
circumstances, restore a suspended or expelled mason to his
membership in his lodge. We acknowledge our inability to
perceive the justness of this rule, in its strictness.

Whenever this Grand Lodge shall reverse or abrogate the
decision of a subordinate lodge, suspending or expelling a
brother, and shall restore him to the benefits and privileges
of Masonry, he shall not thereby be restored to membership
within the body from which he was suspended or expelled,
without its unanimous consent. — Consts. Mass., R. I., Maine,
Ohio, Neb., Ind., Ky., D. C, Miss. Reg. Term., 1857.

The Constitution of Vermont contains the same provision
verbatim, except the last four words.

Restoration to the privileges of Masonry, by the Grand
Lodge, does not restore to membership in a subordinate
lodge. — Const. N. Y., Min. Reg. Ark., 1854.

The Constitution of Pennsylvania provides, that a brother
suspended for non-payment of dues, may, on payment of the
same, be restored to good masonic standing, by a majority
vote ; but cannot again become a member except by regular
petition and the usual course. A brother suspended or ex-
pelled for any other cause, must apply by petition, and a
majority of the lodge must request the Grand Lodge to

HESTORATION. 363

remove the suspension or expulsion ; which being removed,
the brother must apply, in regular form, and receive a unani-
mous ballot.

A brother, whose expulsion may have been confirmed by
the Grand Lodge, can only be restored by that body, or by
the unanimous vote of the lodge by which he was suspended.

Restoration by the Grand Lodge does not restore to mem-
bership.— Const. N. C.

Reversing or abrogating the decision of a subordinate lodge,
suspending or expelling a brother, shall not, (although it
restores him to all the privileges of Masonry) restore him to
membership in the lodge from which he was suspended or
expelled, without its unanimous consent. — Const. Fla.

If a sentence of expulsion or suspension be reversed by
the Grand Lodge, it shall not restore the party to membership
in his lodge, without the unanimous ballot of the lodge in his
favor. Nor shall a brother who has been expelled, be restored
to masonic privileges, except by the Grand Lodge, and on
the recommendation of the lodge which expelled him. —
Const. La.

No expelled mason shall be restored to the privileges of
Masonry, except by a vote of the Grand Lodge,* and such
restoration shall not reinstate him in membership in the lodge
from which he was expelled, without the unanimous consent
of the members thereof. — Const. 111.

Whenever this Grand Lodge shall restore a suspended or
expelled brother to the benefits and privileges of Masonry,
he shall not thereby be restored to membership within the
body from which he was suspended or expelled. — Const. Wis.

The Constitutions of Alabama, Kansas and Missouri con-
tain a provision, in substance, the same as that of Massa-
chusetts.

The suspended brother shall petition the lodge for his

• An application for reinstatement must be accompanied with a recommen*
elation from the lodge which expelled, if in existence.— Res., 1856.

864 RESTORATION.

restoration, and all the proceedings shall be had, as in the
case of a brother applying for membership, including the
unanimous ballot. An expelled brother ceases to be a mason,
and his restoration to the order is therefore equivalent to the
admission of a profane. He must, therefore, petition the
lodge, and his petition take the same course as of an appli-
cant for the mysteries of our order, when, if he be received,
he shall be re-obligated to the performance of every masonic
duty. * * * The Grand Lodge may reverse the decision
of its subordinate, and decree the restoration of the appellant
to the rights and privileges of Masonry, but not to member-
ship in the lodge. — Const Iowa.

It is the opinion of this Grand Lodge, that when a sentence
of suspension or expulsion by a subordinate lodge is reversed
by the Grand Lodge, such reversal does not restore the sus-
pended or expelled brother to membership in the subordinate
lodge, without consent of the members thereof. — Res. Term.

A subordinate lodge under this jurisdiction cannot reinstate
a mason to membership, who has. been suspended or expelled
by another jurisdiction, without first obtaining the consent
of that jurisdiction. — Res. Ala., 1848.

It is competent for a subordinate lodge to restore an ex-
pelled member of the fraternity to the rights and privileges
of Masonry, upon satisfactory evidence of his reformation.
— Me., 1832.

No action can be taken upon such question, except at a
stated meeting of the lodge, and after the application for such
restoration shall have lain over one month. All such appli-
cations must be in writing, signed by the applicant, and recom-
mended by at least two members of the lodge. — Const. Md.

The generally received opinion is, that restoration to the
privileges of Masonry, by a Grand Lodge, does not restore
to membership in the subordinate lodge. The only Grand
Lodges that have ever acted contrary to it, we believe, are
the Grand Lodge of Bouth Carolina, and the Grand Lodge
of England, each in one instance only. — Hatch, C. F. C. of
N. Y., 1851,

RESTORATION. 3G5

As to the right of Grand Lodges to restore expelled mem-
bers to membership in the lodge expelling them, the com-
mittee hold, that each lodge is to be the sole judge as to who
shall, and who shall not, be associated with them as members
of the lodge.— Mitchell, C. F. C. Mo., 1850.

No subordinate lodge under this jurisdiction, shall have
power to heal, restore, or affiliate any expelled, suspended,
or irregularly made mason, except under the authority of the
Grand Lodge, for that express purpose. — Res. La., 1855.

When the Grand Lodge terminates an indefinite suspension,
it restores the brother not only to the privileges of Masonry,
but to membership in his lodge ; but otherwise, in case of
expulsion.— Lewis, G.M. of N. Y., 1858. C. F. C. Term., 1858.

"When a subordinate lodge has become extinct, there is no
other body to restore but the Grand Lodge of the jurisdiction.
This power has been heretofore exercised by this Grand
body, (1848).— Tucker, G. M. Vt, 1853.

If a lodge choose to reinstate a brother suspended for
non-payment of dues, without his paying the debt, it can do
so, unless its by-laws say he shall stand suspended until the
debt is paid. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 187

An application for reinstatement, by a suspended or ex-
pelled mason, must be in writing, by petition, and lie over
one month. — Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

The power of removing a suspension remains with the
lodge that imposed it. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 74.

Our impression is, that the Grand Lodge into whose juris-
diction a suspended brother has removed, may safely claim
authority to restore him. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 74.

A motion to reinstate must lie over at least one month. —
Morris, Am. F. M., iv., 141.

We deny the right of a Grand Lodge to restore to mem-
bership, unless the power to do so is expressly contained in
its constitution. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev., vi., 9.

366 RESTORATION.

Expelled oi suspended masons can only be restored by the
Grand Lodge on recommendation of the lodge that expelled
or suspended them. — Gedge, G. M. ^a., 1852.

The power to restore must exist somewhere. If not as-
sumed by constitutional regulation of Grand Lodge, it is in
the lodges. There is no ancient general regulation on the
subject. Restoration is governed by local regulations. If
none exist, the majority rules. — C. W. Moore, 1849.

Under the English practice, the act of restoration by the
Grand Lodge, both in cases of expulsion and suspension,
restores the delinquent to all the privileges which he pre-
viously enjoyed, including his membership. But it is very
questionable, whether a Grand Lodge is within the line of its
duty, when it attempts to force an offensive member into any
lodge.— C. W. Moore, 1850.

Resolved, That the Grand Lodge retains the exclusive power
to restore expelled masons, upon such representation from
the subordinate lodge as may be satisfactory. — Ind., 1857.

A lodge may restore a member before the expiration of his
term of suspension, provided no action has been had in the
premises by the Grand Lodge. — C. W. Moore, 1845.

An expelled mason can only be reinstated by the lodge
which expelled him, if it be in existence, or by the Grand
Lodge. If he has removed into another Grand jurisdiction,
he may be restored by special permission of that Grand
kodge.— Ibid., 1846.

The Grand Lodge retains the exclusive power to restore
expelled masons, upon such representation from the subordi-
nate lodge as may be satisfactory. — Res. Ind., 1838.

Application for restoration must, in all cases, be accom-
panied with recommendation of lodge which expelled, if such
lodge be in existence. — Res. III., 1856.

A Grand Lodge has no power to compel a subordinate lodge
to reinstate to full membership — Parvin, C. F. C. Iowa, 18481,

RESTORATION. 367

When the Grand Lodge restores to the rights ai.d privi-
leges of Masonry, the lodge expelling may exclude said
restored mason from visiting it, or participating in its fes-
tivities, or on funeral occasions. — Res. Tenn., 1853.

It is a sound principle of masonic law, that no lodge can
reinstate a person expelled by another lodge ; but that appli-
cation must be made to the lodge that pronounced the sen-
tence of expulsion. — Texas, 1855. Abell, C. F. C. CaL, 1858.

A Grand Lodge has no power to restore to membership an
expelled mason, whose expulsion was by a lodge working
under the jurisdiction of any other Grand Lodge. — Res.
Mo., 1843.

When a lodge expelled a brother, and on appeal, the Grand
Lodge reversed the sentence, and substituted definite sus-
pension held, that at the end of the suspension, the brother
was not restored to membership in the lodge, as the Grand
Lodge could net do indirectly what it could not do directly,
viz : restore to membership in a lodge. — Hillyer, G. M.
Miss., 1855. Mellex, Acacia, 1855.

If, on appeal, the Grand Lodge reverses the decision of the
subordinate, (in suspension or expulsion) on the ground of
error in proceeding, or innocence, that reversal annuls the
judgment, and it is as if never pronounced ; and, in masonic
law, the matter stands as if no such judgment had ever been
pronounced. The effect of reversal is, that he never was
suspended or expelled at all. — Pike, Ark., 1854. Mellen,
Miss., 1855.

It is not necessary for a subordinate lodge to apply for
and receive the sanction of the Grand Lodge, on the appli-
cation of an expelled member for re-admission ; but it may
proceed, as in case of first admission into the order. — Fraily,
G. M. of B. C, 1855.

Every action of a lodge for restoration must be done at a
stated communication, and after due notice. If the Grand
Lodge restores a suspended mason contrary to the wishes

868 *. RESTORATION.

of the lodge, he at once resumes his place and functions k
the lodge. The general opinion in this country is, that the
•Grand Lodge may restore an expelled mason to the rights
and^ privileges, but cannot restore him to membership in his
lodge ; but where the decision of the lodge as to the guilt
of the individual is reversed, and the Grand Lodge declares
him to be innocent, 01 that the charge against him has not
been proved, I hold that it is compelled, by a just regard
to the rights of the expelled member, to restore him, not
only to the rights and privileges of Masonry, but also to
membership in his lodge. — Mackey, U. M. L., xviii., 352.

Our Grand Lodge recognizes the doctrine, that no lodge
can restore the party expelled or suspended, except the one
which inflicted the punishment. — Hall, G. M. Texas, 1858.

No lodge has the power of reinstating, except the o^e which
inflicted the original punishment. — Mackey, Lexicon, 400.

An expelled mason must petition the same lodge that ex-
pelled him, for reinstatement, ii it is still in existence; if
not, he can petition the Grand Lodge under which the lodge
was held. An expelled or suspended mason cannot be re-
stored by any but the lodge by which the trial was had,
except by a special order of the Grand Lodge. — J. W. S.
Mitchell, 1856.

A lodge cannot restore a brother to fellowship, who is be-
lieved at the time to be a criminal. — J. W. S. Mitchell, 1856.

Restoration of an expelled or suspended mason does not
restore to membership in the lodge. — Va., 1858.

The lodge which suspends or expels a mason, is the only
lodge which can reinstate him. — Va., 1858.

No lodge can reinstate to membership any mason, except
the lodge which suspended or expelled him. — C. F. C. Fla.,
1850.

The Grand Lodge of Georgia, (1853) refused to restore a
brother to membership, without consent of the lodge which
expelled him.

RESTORATION — AFTER DEFINITE SUSPENSION, 369

After Definite Suspension.
A brother definitely suspended, is restored to his former
rights and privileges by the expiration of his sentence, and
without action of any kind. {See Definite Suspension.)

A brother is reinstated without ballot, when the time has
expired for which he was suspended. — Texas, 1852 C Moore,
Mas. Rev., x., 242.

Payment of the debt, (when suspended for non-payment of
dues) restores without action of the lodge. — Mackey, U. M.
L., xvii., 312.

Restoration from definite suspension is terminated -vitbout
any special action of the lodge, but simply by termination
of period for which the party was suspended. He then re-
enters at once into possession of all the rights, benefits and
functions from which he had been temporarily suspended. —
Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 342.

A brother suspended from membership for non-payment
of dues, is restored on payment, without action. — Gedge,
G. M. La., 1852.

If a suspension by its terms, be, " until dues are paid,"
the payment restores without vote ; but if suspended indefi-
nitely, a unanimous vote is required. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1852.

The definite suspension of a brother requires no action of
the lodge that suspended him, to restore him to fellowship. —
Ark., 1854.

After the expiration of the time for which a member was
suspended, the brother so suspended is entitled to all the
rights and privileges that he enjoyed before his suspension ;
and if he was a member of the lodge by which he was sus-
pended, a ballot is not necessary to restore him to that privi-
lege.— N. C, 1853.

A definite suspension of a brother requires no action of
the lodge that suspended him, to restore him to fellowship. —
Res. Ark.

16*

370 RESTORATION — VOTE NECESSART TO RESTORE.

To the above, Mellen, C. F. C. Mississippi, 1856, says:
" We know not how a different opinion could be entertained
by any one."

A brother definitely suspended, is most assuredly rein-
stated by the expiration of the time. — Hillyer, G. M. Miss.,

1855.
m
A brother suspended i>r a definite period, returns to his

membership, at the expiration of that period, without action

of the lodge.— Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

According to general usage, and agreeably to reason, phi-
losophy and common sense, a brother is restored by the very
termination of his sentence, without any action of the lodge.
Morris, Am. F. M., iv., 12.

We take the ground, that a member suspended for non-
payment of dues, reinstates himself by making payment. —
Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 108.

In our opinion, it is necessary for a lodge to act upon the
reinstating of a brother, who has been suspended, and the
time expired. This is necessary, that the records may ex-
hibit a full transcript of the whole case, from beginning to
termination — the offense, the suspension, and restoration. —
C. W. Moore.

To the above, Mellen, (Acacia, 1855), says : We combatted
this opinion, when expressed by the Grand Lodge of Vir-
ginia. A person is imprisoned six months ; it requires no
further action of the court to open the prison doors after
that term has expired ; and, as the doors close behind him,
he is reinvested with all the rights and privileges of which
he was divested.

"What Vote is Necessary to Restore.

An unanimous ballot is necessary to restore an exptlled
mason ; but, as a general rule, a two-third vote is sufficient to
reinstate after suspension.*

I conceive that an individual, indefinitely suspended, may,

* See Voting. Majority Necessary.

RESTORATION — VOTE NECESSARY TO RESTORE. 371

at any legal time, be restored by a mere majority of the lodge,
as reason and analogy tioth direct to the conclusion that, a
lodge may express its will, in matters unregulated by the
Constitutions, through the vote of the majority. — Mackey
U. M. L., xvii., 350.

The restoration of an expelled mason, is equivalent to the
admission of a profane ; and I conceive that to reverse a sen-
tence of expulsion, and to restore an expelled mason, will re-
quire as unanimous a vote as that which is necessary on a
ballot for initiation. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 350.

Our opinion is, that upon general principles, it requires the
same vote to restore an expelled, or indefinitely suspended,
mason, as to initiate a person into the order. — Morris, Am.
F. M., iv., 19.

A lodge may reinstate a suspended or expelled member,
when no appeal has been taken to the Grand Lodge, by a
vote of two-thirds, in cases of suspension, and an unanimous
vote, in cases of expulsion. — Texas, 1854.

It requires the same unanimous vote to remove an order
expelling or suspending a member of a lodge from the priv-
ileges of Masonry, that is requisite for the admission of a pe-
titioner for membership. — Const. Fla.

A suspended companion or brother, can be reinstated only
by unanimous ballot, on petition, same as for membership. —
Res. G. Chap. Indiana, 1856.

An expelled mason cannot be restored by a verbal applica-
cation. Must send a petition, which is referred to a commit-
tee, who report in writing, when a ballot is taken, as for
membership. — C. W. Moore, 1857.

In all cases of a restoration of a suspended mason, a vote
of two-thirds of the members present shall be requisite, and
the proceedings shall be had at a meeting of which the mem-
bers of the lodge shall have due notice. — Res. Cal., 1855.

Resolved, That when a companion or a brother is supended
by a chapter, he can only be reinstated by an unanimous ballot
in his favor ; to attain which he must petition, and his peti

312 RESTORATION — VOTE NECESSARY TO RESTORE.

tion shall take the same course as those of candidates foi
membership. — G. Chap. Iowa, 1856. Gedge, G. M. La., 1852.

When a member of a lodge is expelled, for unmasonic con-
duct, he can be restored to his former masonic privileges by an
unanimous vote of the lodge ; but if suspended, and he wishes
to return after his suspension expires, he has a right to do so,
and he is entitled to all the rights and privileges which he
enjoyed before his suspension ; and, as he was a member of
the lodge, a ballot is not necessary to restore him to privilege.
— Bain, of N. C, 1858.

It requires the same unanimous vote to remove the order
suspending a member of any lodge from the privileges of Ma-
sonry, which is requisite for the admission of a candidate or
new member. — Const. Ky.

The Grand Lodge of Tennessee will not, hereafter, restore
an expelled mason to the rights and privileges of Masonry,
except by the unanimous vote of the members present. —
Tenn., 1853.

It requires an unanimous vote to restore an expelled

mason C. Moore, Mas. Rev., x., 242. J. W. S. Mitchell,

1855.

In the absence of any law or usage on that subject, we
think the same vote that suspended should be required to re-
move that suspension. — 0. Moore, Mas. Rev., xiv., 110.

I think that no greater vote is required to restore, than was
required to pass the sentence. — G. H. Gray, Sen,, 1857.

Two-thirds are required for the reinstatement of a sus-
pended, and an unanimous vote for an expelled brother. — Va.,
1858. The consent of a majority is necessary for reinstate-
ment after suspension for non-payment of dues. — lb.

Indefinite suspension and expulsion alike require an unani-
mous ballot to restore.— Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

RESTORATION — VOTE NECESSARY TO RESTORE. 31 3

An expelled or suspended mason may be restored by the
lodge in which he was expelled or suspended, by the unani-
mous vote of the lodge. — Const. Ark.

The ordeal of an unanimous ballot, and the scrutiny of an
investigating committee, ought to be the only terms upon
which a suspended mason ought to be received into good
fellowship. — Ed. Mas. Mir. and Key., 1858.

When no appeal has been taken to the Grand Lodge, a
lodge may reinstate a suspended mason, by a two-thirds vote,
and an expelled mason by an unanimous vote ; provided, notice
of the application be given at least two stated meetings pre-
vious to action. — Res. Texas.

No expelled mason shall be reinstated, without the unani-
mous consent of all the members of the lodge present. —
Const. Md.

VOTING

MODE OF VOTING.

Except for candidates for the degrees or for membership >
in elections of officers, and in masonic trials, the usual and
most ancient masonic mode of voting, is, by a "show of
hands ;" that is, by holding up the right hand.

In all questions in the Grand and Subordinate Lodge, which
are competent, by the by-laws, to be decided by acclamation,
the vote shall be taken by holding up the right hand ; and the
formula for proposing the question from the Chair, shall be in
these words : " So many as are in favor of this motion, will
hold up the right hand, at the blow of the gavel ;" and after-
wards, " So many as are opposed to it, will make the same
sign ;" and the uplifted hands shall, when necessary, be
counted by the Senior Deacon, who shall report the same to
the Chair,-& C, 1854.

The opinions or votes of the members are always to be sig-
nified by each holding up one of his hands. * * * Nor
should any other kind of division be ever admitted among
masons. — New Reg. G. L. Eng., 1767.

In the Grand Lodge of New Jersey, all votes, except those
requiring a ballot, " are to be signified by holding up of right
hands."

The votes of the members are always to be signified by
each holding up one of his hands. — Const. Canada.

Voting by ayes and noes is contrary to ancient usage. The
true masonic mode of voting, when ballots are not required,
is by show of hands.— G. M. of N. H., 1858.

No lodge shall decide on the petition of any candidate for

VOTING — WHAT MAJORITIES NECESSARY. 375

initiation or membership, in any other manner than by ballot
—Const. Md,

Calling ayes and noes is an innovation. — English, C. F. C.
Ark., 1850.

In Tennessee, it is held, that taking a vote by ayes and noes
is unmasonic. It must be done by ballot, or by showing
hands.— C. F. C. Tenn., 1852,

The holding up of the hands is not the proper way to take
the sense of the lodge. It should be viva voce, or by ballot. —
Com. La., 1854.

Voting viva voce, is not in accordance with ancient usages.
—Iowa, 1849.

The question in Masonry is not taken viva voce, or by " aye
and nay," but by a " show of hands." — Mackey, P. M. L., 146.

In masonic trials, the vote on the nature of the punishment
should be taken by a show of hands. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii.,
325.

The true masonic mode of voting is by ball ballots, or by
show of hands, and not by ayes and noes. — N. C, 1851.

The best mode of voting is, by raising the hand ; but tak-
ing the ayes and noes, viva voce, is most common in the west-
ern states. — Morris, Code Mas. Law, 397.

What Majorities Necessary.

In the absence of constitutional, or other regulation, we
should consider the following majorities as sanctioned by the
best usage : For degrees, membership, restoration after ex-
pulsion * excusing from balloting, and^onorary membership,
an unanimous ballot is requisite.

For conviction on masonic trial, expulsion, indefinite sus-
pension, and restoration after indefinite suspension,! a two*
thirds majority is necessary.

For definite suspension, suspension of membership, erasure

• See "Restoration. Vote necessary." f Ibid.

316 VOTING — WHAT MA JORITIES s NECESSARY.

from the roll, reprimand, censure, granting demit, withdi awal
of petition, waiving jurisdiction, and transacting the general
business of the lodge, (including elections,) a majority vote is
sufficient.

No mason shall be suspended or expelled by any lodge, ex-
cept by the concurrence of two-thirds of the members present ;
and no mason, so expelled, can be restored to the privileges
of Masonry by a subordinate lodge, except the same be spe-
cially convened for that purpose, and then only by an unani-
mous vote. — Consts. Mo. and Kansas.

In cases of the suspension, expulsion, or restoration of a
member, two-thirds of the votes of the members present shall
be required, by ballot. — Consts. N. J., EL, Wis., and Iowa.

For expulsion or suspension, definite or indefinite, the vote
must be two-thirds of those present ; but for reprimand, a
majority will be sufficient. The votes on the nature of the
punishment, must be taken by show of hands. — Const. S. C.

It shall require a vote of two-thirds of the members pres-
ent to sustain any specification or charge. No greater num-
ber of votes shall be required to inflict a punishment, than is
necessary to sustain a charge. — Const. Ark.

A vote of two-thirds shall be necessary to find a verdict of
guilty, and a like vote shall be required to suspend or expel ;
but a majority shall be sufficient to reprimand or censure. A
vote of two-thirds shall be requisite to restore a suspended
or expelled mason. — Regs. Cal.

In all cases of suspension or expulsion, two-thirds of the
master masons present must concur in the sentence. — Const.
Ala. **

In all cases of suspension or expulsion of any member from
the privileges of Masonry, two-thirds of the votes of all tho
members present shall be required ; provided, in all such cases
a majority of the whole lodge be present. — Ibid.

An absolute majority of all the votes cast, shall be neces-
sary to convict; three-fourths to expel; two-thirds to sus«

VOTING— -WHAT MAJORITIES NECESSARY. 377

pend; and a majority to reprove or reprimand. In no case
shall a brother be allowed to vote, who was not present at
the commencement, and during the whole progress of, the
trial. — Const. La.

A two-thirds vote shall be required to inflict the penalty
of expulsion. — Const. Min.

A majority of all the members present may expel a brother,
for unmaeonic conduct. * * * An expelled brother shall,
in no case, be restored to the privileges of Masonry, without
an unanimous vote. — Res. Tenn., 1853.

A majority of the members shall be sufficient to suspend a
member ; two-thirds of those present shall be necessary to
expel. — Const. D. C.

A suspension may be removed by a majority; but the
unanimous consent of the lodge present shall be necessary
for the reinstatement of an expelled mason. — lb.

A vote of two-thirds present, is required to suspend or
expel. — Const. N. C.

The prevailing opinion is, that definite suspension may be
inflicted by a two-thirds vote. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 314.

No one can be indefinitely suspended, unless after due
trial, and upon at least a two-thirds vote of the members
present. — Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 315.

The usage has obtained, of requiring a two-thirds vote to
secure a conviction, in masonic trials. — Mackey, U. M. L.,
xvii., 324.

A member indefinitely suspended, for gross unmasonic
conduct, should not be restored without an unanimous vote.
— Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

A majority vote is sufficient to suspend, expel, or repri-
mand a brother. The Master has the right, ex officio, to
reprimand any offending or disorderly member or visitor,
without the vote of the lodge. — Ibid.

Masonry has no usage or rule requiring a two-third vote

378 VOTING — WHAT MAJORITIES NECESSARY.

to expel. A majority vote is sufficient, and no by-laws she uld
exist contrary thereto. — Ibid.

Resolved, That a recommendation of a subordinate lodge,
authorizing a candidate to take the degrees in another lodge,
out of its jurisdiction, must be passed at a regular commu-
nication, and- by an unanimous vote. — Miss., 1850.

The resolution, (above,) as adopted, we hold, contains a
radical error, and removes an old landmark, or usage of the
society. Numerous decisions of Grand Lodges have been
made on the point, that a majority vote, in such cases, is suf-
ficient—Hatch, C. F. C. ofN. Y., 1850.

The vote to waive jurisdiction is not by ballot, but viva
voce, or by show of hands, and a bare majority may carry
it.— Morris, Am. F. M., iv., 77.

I know of no ancient written law upon the subject ; but it
seems to me that the question of consent 'for one lodge to
finish the work of another) is simply in the nature of a reso-
lution, and may be determined by a majority vote. — Mackey,
U. M. L., xvii., 230.

I have no doubt that censure may be done on mere motion,
without previous notice, and by a bare majority present. —
Mackey, U. M. L., xvii., 305.

A two-thirds vote, at least, (in our opinion,) should be re-
quired to suspend or expel any brother. — Haswell, C. F. C.
Vt., 1851. J. W. S. Mitchell, 1855.

No question can arise in- a subordinate lodge requiring
unanimity, except balloting for degrees or membership. —
Reg. Tenn., 1857.

The Grand Lodge (Maryland) has always held, that a ma-
jority may expel.— C. F. C. Md., 1854.

The Mississippi law requires two-thirds to expel ; but an
unanimous vote to re-admit to the fraternity. — Mellen, C. F. C.
Miss., 1855.

Two-thirds of all the members present shall be necessary

VOTING WHAT MAJORITIES NECESSARY. 379

to expel from all the rights and privileges of Masonry ; but
a majority shall be sufficient to inflict minor punishment. No
expelled mason shall be restored to the rights and privileges
of Masonry, without an unanimous vote. — Res. Ohio, 1821.

The Committee on Foreign Correspondence of Florida, for
1850, object to recommending candidates by one lodge to
another, by less than an unanimous vote.

The usage best known in this jurisdiction is, that a major-
ity is sufficient to grant a demit. — Mo., 1858.

THE MASTER.

RIGHTS, PREROGATIVES, AND AUTHORITY OF.

The powers and privileges of the Master of a lodge are
by no means limited in extent. No one can preside in his
lodge in his presence, without his consent, and it therefore
follows, that charges against him cannot be tried in his lodge.
He may call to his assistance any master mason he pleases ;
may call special meetings, and open, close, or call off his
lodge, at pleasure. He may command the attendance of his
officers and members at' any time, by summons ; may appoint
all committees net otherwise provided for ; may decide all
questions of order or masonic law ; has the right to install
his officers, after he has been himself installed, and also his
successor in nice; has special charge of the charter of his
lodge, and, in extreme cases, may refuse to open his lodge,
or to deliver to any subordinate officer, or to the members,
the possession of the charter. He is, however, bound to
conform to the Constitution and edicts of his Grand Lodge,
and the by-laws of his own lodge, and all the ancient estab-
lished usages and landmarks of the order. He would not be
justified in refusing to put any motion, regularly made and
seconded, not conflicting with the above. He cannot autho-
rize any brother, even though he be a Past Master, to preside
in his absence; cannot refuse to declare a vote or ballot,
when regularly taken ; and cannot refuse to sign a diploma
for a brother in good standing. These are a few of his many
rights and privileges.

The Master of a particular lodge has the right and authority
oi congregating the members of his lodge, at pleasure, upon

THE MASTER — RIGHTS, PREROGATIVES, AND AUTHORITY OP. 381

any emergency or occurrence, as well as to appoint the time
and place of their usual forming. — Old Reg., 1720, ii.

We believe it is well settled by nearly every Grand Lodge
in the United States, that agreeable to masonic law, the power
of a Master in his lodge is absolute. He is the supreme
arbiter of all questions of order, so far as the meeting is
concerned, nor can any appeal be made from his decision to
that of the lodge. He is amenable for his conduct to the
Grand Lodge alone, and to that body must every complaint
against him be made. For no misdemeanor, however great,
can he be tried by his lodge, for as no one has a right to
preside there in his presence, except himself, it would be
absurd to suppose that he could sit as the judge in his own
case.— C. F. C. Fla., 1848. Haswell, C. F. C. Vt., 1851.

Another lodge was closed by its Master early in the winter,
till the next annual election, for alleged insubordination.
The principle I hold to be erroneous. — Lewis, G. M. of N.
F., 1858.

All committees shall be appointed by the Master. — Standard
By-laws, N. Y., 1858.

The Master has no power to put off the stated monthly
communication of his lodge. He is bound to support the
by-laws of his lodge. — C. W. Moore, 1845.

The Master has no right to delegate his authority iu his
lodge ; in his absence, all his authority is vested in the Senior
"Warden. — Anderson, G. M. HI, 1855. Grand Lodge, do.

Except in such matters as manifestly infringe the estab-
lished regulations of Masonry, it is a stretch of power for
the Master to refuse to entertain a motion regularly made
and seconded. — Morris, 1859.

After his own installation, the Master has the power to
install the rest of his officers. Has particularly in charge
the warrant of Constitution ; right to call special meetings
when he pleases, and is sole judge of emergency requiring
them ; right to close his lodge at any hour, whether business

382 THE MASTER — RIGHTS, PREROGATIVES, AND AUTHORITY OP.

is finished or not ; is supreme in his lodge, so far as the lodge
is concerned; is his prerogative to appoint all committees
not otherwise specially provided; and is ex officio chairman
of every committee he chooses to attend. — Macket, P. M. L.

The Master cannot suspend a member of the lodge. —
Morris. Am. F. M., ii., 147.

It would be legal for the Master to take himself, together
with the charter, out of the lodge, while at labor, without
closing the lodge. — Ibid, iii., 2.

The Master, when about to be absent for several meetings,
cannot delegate his authority to a Past Master during such
absence. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 18.

According to general usage, the Master may vote in his
capacity of member once; and if there be a tie, he may vote
again as presiding officer. — Morris, Am. F. M., iv., 61.

The decisions of the Master upon questions of masonic law
and usage are, with respect to his own lodge, absolute. —
Miss., 18.50.

The Master is ex officio chairman of the Board of Relief;
he appoints all committees ; holds the charter, jewels, and
title deeds belonging to the lodge, in his possession ; draws
all orders upon the Treasurer ; calls lodge meetings at his
pleasure; admits or rejects visiting brethren at his dis-
cretion ; has the casting vote when the count is equal, &c. —
Morris, Code Mas. Law, 368.

Within the limits of the ancient charges and regulations
of the order, the rules and constitutions of the Grand Lodge,
and the by-laws of his lodge, the authority of the Master is
supreme during his term of office. — Heard, Mass., 1856.

Master's rights do not take effect until his installation.
Absolute in his own lodge. Obedience is his right. Lodge
cannot remove, censure, or suspend him, vote him from the
cnair, or prevent him taking it. Cannot compel him to open,
close, or adjourn the lodge. Ho decides all points of order,
ceremonial, masonic law ; discipline, including arrangement

MASTER — APPEAL FROM DECISION OF THE. 383

of business, &c, is only amenable to Grand Lodge. Visitors
only admitted by his permission. — D. G. M. Ireland, 1857.

"When any motion, not contrary to the laws, shall have been
regularly made and seconded, it shall not be competent for
the Grand Master, or brother officiating in the chair, to refuse
to put the same to vote ; and if any doubt shall arise as to
the interpretation of a law, the power of deciding the same
shall be vested not in the chair, but in the meeting, — ConsU
Scot.

This we believe to be perfectly consistent with the spirit
and the letter of ancient Freemasonry. — G. W. C.

The decision of the Master, on a point of (masonic) law, is
not a proper subject for discussion by his lodge, unless by
his request and permission. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

It is the prerogative of the Master to postpone the work
at any time, at his discretion. — Ibid.

The Master has the power, as it is his duty, to reprimand
a brother, if necessary, to prevent confusion among the
workmen, or even have him led out of the lodge. — Ibid.

By ancient usage, it is one of the privileges of the Master
to call to his counsel and assistance any of the well-informed
brethren. — Ibid.

Appeals from the Decision of the Master.
It is well settled, that no appeal can be taken from the
decision of a Master in the chair, to the lodge. The rule is
absolute, and admits of no exception. His decisions cannot
even be discussed by the lodge, except by his consent. (We
do not think the same rule should apply to a Grand Master.)
The only appeal allowed from the decision of the Master of a
subordinate lodge is to the Grand Lodge

Appeals from the decision of the W. Master are not au-
thorized by the usages of Masonry. They are unknown. —
Hubbard, G. 31. Ohio, 1851.

No appeal from the decision of the Master of a lodge lies

384 MASTER — APPEALS FROM DECISION OF TE E.

in any case whatsoever. Right or wrong, as any individual
member may suppose, it is final, and reversable only by him-
self, or by the Grand Lodge, in a proper way. — Ibid.

Agreeable to masonic law, the power of a Master in his
lodge is absolute. He is the supreme arbiter of all questions
of order, so far as the meeting is concerned ; nor can any
appeal be made from his decision to that of the lodge. He
is amenable for his conduct to the Grand Lodge alone, and
to that body must every complaint against him be made.
For no misdemeanor, however great, can he be tried by his
lodge ; for, as no one has a right to preside there, in his
presence, except himself, it would be absurd to suppose that
he could sit as the judge in his own case. — Haswell, Vt., 1851.

No appeal to the lodge can be taken from the decision of
the Master, on the Warden occupying the chair in his ab-
sence.— Consts. N. Y. and Min.

No appeal lies from the decision of a Grand Master in the
chair, or his Deputy or Warden occupying the chair in his
absence.— Rid. C. F. C. N. K, 1852.

The decision of the Master of a lodge cannot be reversed.
Const. N. C.

No appeal from the decision of the Master in the chair, lies
to the lodge. — Const. D. C.

An appeal from the decisions of the Grand Master may be
had at any time, if the call therefor is seconded. — Const. Ala.

No appeal from any decision of the Master of a lodge shall
be taken to the body of the lodge. — Const. Oregon.

Appeals to the lodge, from the decision of the Master, are
not in accordance with masonic law.— G. M. of N. H., 1850.

There is no appeal from the decision of the Grand Master
in any matter coming before him for his decision in Grand
Lodge ; and the same rule applies to the Master of a subor-
dinate lodge, or any other officer while presiding. — Res. Cal.
1850.

MASTER— APPEALS FROM DECISION OF THE. 385

No appeal lies from the decision of a Master of a subor-
dinate lodge, or his Wardens, in the chair, except to Grand
Lodge.— C. F. C. N. H., 1852.

It is the judgment of the Grand Lodge of Georgia, that no
appeal can be entertained from the decision of the Master to
the lodge over which he presides. — Res. Geo., 1851.

The decision of a presiding officer in a lodge is conclusive,
and there is no appeal therefrom. — English, C. F. C. Ark., 1850.

Where there is no express provision to the contrary, we
consider an appeal from the Grand Master not only allowa-
ble, but an inherent right. — Fuller, C. F. C. Tenn., 1858

Resolved, That an appeal does lie in all cases from the de-
cision of the General Grand High Priest to the General Grand
Chapter, which alone can, in the last resort, by vote of two
thirds of the members present, determine what is the masonic
law or custom. Provided, that this resolution, as a rule, ope-
rating in the decisions of this G. G. Body, shall only operate
and have effect in this body, and shall not be considered as
operating, or having any effect in State Grand Chapters or
subordinates. — G. G. CJwp., 1856.

It is not in accordance with ancient masonic usage, to allow
an appeal to be taken from the decision of the Master, to tho
lodgo which he governs, upon any question whatever. For
any undue assumption of authority, he is amenable to the
Grand Lodge, which alone has a right to hear and determine
such matters.— C. F. C. Ohio, 1848.

In which your committee fully concur. — C. F. C. of R. I.,
1850.

Xo appeal lies from the decision of the Grand Master, in
the chair, or his deputy or Wardens occupying the chair, in
his absence. The same rule applies to the Master and his
Wardens.— Hatch, C. F. C. of N. Y., 1851.

There is no appeal from the decision of the Master in the
cnair.— C. F. C. of N. C, 1851.

An appeal does not lie from the decision of the Grand
17

386 MASTER — APPEALS FROM DECISION OP THE.

Master to the body of the Grand Lodge, under no circnm
stances whatever ; and so likewise the decision of a Master
of a lodge, upon a matter properly submitted to him, is final
and conclusive.— C. F. C. of CaL, 1851.

In the Grand Lodge of New Jersey, 1855, on a motion to
adopt, the chair decided, &c, and "the decision was ap-
pealed from. Question taken on the appeal, and chair sus-
tained." In the same Grand Lodge, in 1856, a similar appeal
was decided to be out of order

There can be no appeal from the decision of the Master,
except to the Grand Lodge. — Standard By-laws, S. C, 1856.
Miss., 1850.

According to masonic usage, no appeal lies from the de-
cision of the Master of a lodge to the lodge over which he
presides. The only remedy of a member who feels aggrieved
by the decision of his Master, is to be sought in an appli-
cation to the Grand Lodge. — Rice, B. G. M. Geo.t 1856.

We cannot agree with those who claim that no appeal can
be taken from the decision of a Grand Master, or Master, to
the body over which he presides. We regard the assertion
of this power as entirely of modern origin, and not warranted
by the old Constitutions of Masonry. So far as the mere
masonic work of a lodge is concerned, we admit there is
some plausibility in their argument ; but to contend that no
appeal, on any decision whatever, whether business or other-
wipe, can be taken to the body of the lodge, is an assumption
of power altogether too great to repose in the hands of any
one individual.— C. F. C. Tenn., 1853,

The decision of the Master of a lodge upon any question
or point before it, is final and conclusive, and there is no
appeal from it, except to Grand Lodge or the Grand Master.
— Reg. Miss.

It is wrong to admit an appeal, even by courtesy, because
by these is ultimately established a precedent, from which
will be claimed the right to take an appeal. — Ohr, C. F C
MS., 1849.

MASTER — APPEALS FROM DECISION OF THE. 387

Appeals from the decision of the Master are not in confor-
mity with masonic usage. The decision of the Master is
final, except as to the Grand Lodge, to which body he is
amenable. — C. W. Moore, 1850.

This Grand Encampment being a legislative body, acknow-
ledging no superior, admits an appeal from decision of chair,
on any question under consideration ; provided such appeal
shall not be maintained, except by a two-thirds majority.
This right is adopted for the Grand Encampment alone, and
not to be construed as establishing a precedent for any other
masonic body. — G. G. Enc, 1856.

The ancient usage, that there can be no appeal from the
decision of the Master, on questions of masonic law and
usage, is right and proper. But in all cases relating to the
legislative policy and government of the lodge, the majority
ought to rule, and every question affecting no law or usage
of Masonry, ought to be submitted to the voice of the lodge.
The autocratic power of Masonry rel tes solely and entirely
to the work of the order, its landmarks, usages and customs.
— Hynemax, Mir. and Key., 1858.

There is no appeal from the decision of the Grand Master
in any matter coming before him for his decision in Grand
Lodge, and the same rule obtains with the Master of a sub-
ordinate lodge, or the officer presiding. — Res. CaL, 1851.

Highly improper, and contrary to ancient regulations and
landmarks. — III., 1856.

The Grand Lodge of Illinois claims the right of appeal
from the decision of the Grand Master, on a question of
order.— C. F. C. 111., 1858.

We consider a Grand Lodge in these days as simply the
legislature of the craft ; and as it is the supreme authority,
beyond which there is no tribunal where an appeal can be
maintained, it seems a very absurdity that one man, the tem-
porary officer of its own elevation, should be permitted., un-
questioned, to declare upon what subject it shall or shall not

S88 MASTER — APPEALS FROM DECISION OF THE.

deliberate, and with despotic power, to pronounce and main-
tain his single opinion in opposition, as it may be, to the
united voice of the body which created him. — Abell, C. F.
C. CaL, 1858. In which opinion we agree. — G. W. C.

An appeal from the decision of the Master, on a question
of order, is not masonic. — Wis., 1854.

Appeals from the decision of the Grand Master, and pro-
tests against such decisions, are decidedly unmasonic. — C. F.
C. of R. L, 1858.

This Grand Lodge will not sanction an appeal from the
decision of the Master of a lodge. — Tenn., 1856.

The Grand Lodge, (District of Columbia) permits appeals
from the decision of the Grand Master to be taken; and
Ohio has decided, that a member of a subordinate lodge may
appeal from the decision of the Master, and that the lodge
may reverse his decision ; but we hold, that it is wrong to
admit an appeal, even by courtesy. — Parvin, C. F. C. Iowa,
1850.

Entertaining an appeal from the decision of the Grand
Master, is a dangerous precedent. — O'Sullivan, C. F. C. Mo.,
1858.

No appeal lies from the decision of the Master to the lodge
over which he presides, but his decision is final. — ArL, 1852.

There is no appeal from the decision of the Master, except
to the Grand Master, or the Grand Lodge. — Texas, 1855.

There can be no appeal from the decision of the Master to
the lodge, on any question. — Mackey, P. M. L. 124. C. F.
C. Fla., 1850.

Very unmasonic for a Master to permit an appeal from his
decision. — Hall, G. M. Texas, 1858.

In our opinion, the right of a member of a lodge or chapter
to appeal from the decision of the chair, does not exist. —
C. Moore, Ma's. Rev., vi., 113.

According to the usages of Masonry from time immemorial

THE MASTER — SUSPENSION OF BY-LAWS. 389

no appeal can, of right, be taken from the decision of the presid-
ing officer to the body over which he presides. — W. B. Hub-
bard, Thomas R. Bradley, B. B. French. Res. G. G. Chap*,
1850.

In this state, (Pennsylvania,) there is no appeal from the
decision of the Master of a lodge, or the one presiding in his
absence, except to the Grand Lodge. — Bias. Mir. and Key^
1857.

Suspension of By-laws.

It is a well-settled rule of masonic law, th'at a lodge cam it
suspend the operation of a by-law. A by-law can be alter A,
amended, or repealed, in the manner provided for by the by-
laws themselves, and in no other way, (except by a superior
power.) But a by-law cannot be suspended.

No lodge can suspend the operation of a by-law. — Oo-asts.
Me. and Mass.

No lodge can suspend its by-laws. — Coivit. N. C.

Nor shall any lodge suspend the operation of Its by-laws
for any purpose whatever, except by dispensation. — Const. Ga.

No lodge can suspend the operation of a by-law, without
the unanimous consent of the lodge. — Const. Wis.

No lodge under this jurisdiction shall, on any occasion or
pretense whatever, suspend any of its by-laws. — Const. Iowa.*

No lodge can suspend their by-laws, or any of them. —
Consts. Mo. and Kansas.

It has ever been considered here as a principle of masonic
law, that a lodge cannot, under any circumstances, dispense
with, or suspend any portion of, its by-laws. — Mackey, S. C,
1855.

By-laws may be abrogated or amended in the manner pro-
vided for by themselves, or by the Grand Lodge ; but they
cannot be suspended to meet any particular emergency, or
whim of a majority of the members. — C. W. Moore, 1850.

* The Constitution of 1844, adds : " Without the assent of all the members
present."

390 THE MASTER— GALLING OFF.

Our opinion is, that the power to suspend a by-law of a
lodge, resides in the Grand Master, and, in certain cases, in
his Deputy; but nowhere else, unless otherwise determined
by the Grand Lodge. — C. W. Moore.

A lodge has no right to suspend its by-laws. — Hubbard,
Ohio, 1852. Com. Juris, do. G. Lodge do.

A subordinate lodge cannot, by resolution, do away or
change a by-law. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

It is inconsistent with ancient usage, for the by-laws of a
lodge to contain a provision permitting a dispensing with any
portion of the same, under any circumstances. — Reg. 111.

The by-laws are the prescribed rules of masonic action.
To suspend them is to remove every barrier, overthrow the
established usages and customs, and obliterate the landmarks
of the order. — Com. Iowa, 1845.

A lodge cannot suspend its own by-la ws, to suit any partic-
ular case. — Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

There is no power to dispense with, or suspend the by-
laws of a lodge.— Mo., 1858.

If a suspending clause exist in a code of by-laws, they may
be suspended; not otherwise. But such a clause is, at least,
very imprudent. — Morris, Am. F. 31., ii., 14.

Calling Off.
When a masonic body does that which in an ordinary legis-
lative or deliberative assembly is termed " adjourning," it is
denominated " calling off." To call off, is to suspend business
or work until some future period ; to adjourn, is to do the
same. The first is the term usually applied to the adjourn-
ment of a masonic body. It is now considered as the most
appropriate term, and is that almost universally used.

Originally, it is supposed, the term referred exclusively to
the act of suspending labor, for the purpose of partaking of
refreshment, during the day. Hence, the familiar technical
phrase, " calling from labor to refreshment.' Latterly, it has
been used to designate those suspensions of business or work

THE MASTER — CALLING OFF. 39 '

where the peculiar ceremonies of "closing" are partially or
wholly omitted, without reference to the period which would
elapse before the business is resumed.

To call off from time to time, during the same day or evening,
is considered to be consistent and masonic; but the some-
what prevalent practice of calling off a subordinate lodge JroLi
one date to another, is now generally condemned as irregular,
productive of evil, if not decidedly unmasonic.

The Grand Lodges of Delaware, New Hampshire, Main*
Arkansas, California, Louisiana, Wisconsin, North Carolina,
South Carolina, Ohio, New Jersey, Illinois, MarylanDj Ala-
bama, Indiana, Connecticut, Missouri, Tennessee, Iowa, Ver-
mont, New York, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota,
Kentucky, Texas and Oregon, " call off," or " call from labor
to refreshment," from day to day, during their annual commu-
nication, and close at the end of their labors. Virginia and
Mississippi regularly " close " at each sitting. Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, District of Columbia, Kansas and Nebraska,
usually require but one sitting to complete their business,
and, therefore, regularly close. The above, therefore, settles
the regularity of calling off a Grand Lodge, from day to day,
imtil its business is completed. The same rule will not, how-
ever, apply to a subordinate lodge. A communication of a
Grand Lodge may occupy several consecutive days, and in-
clude even ten or more distinct sessions or sittings, and yet
be but one communication ; while a communication of a sub-
ordinate lodge cannot extend beyond the date upon which it
is commenced.

Adjournments are also an innovation ; a lodge about to have
a recess, is reminded, by the Junior Warden, that they are
called from "labor to refreshment;" and on resuming, they
are called from " refreshment to labor." A week or more may
intervene during this recess. — Haswell, Vt, 18f/l.

The Grand Lodge shall not be closed until the business
before it shall have been disposed of; and if it be found im-
practicable to complete the business in one evening, the

392 THE MASTER CALLING OFF.

Grand Lodge shall be called off from labor until a subsequen.
evening; which course shall be adopted until the whol*
amount of business shall have been disposed of. — S. C.,185S.
The stated meetings of subordinate lodges shall not be
construed to mean any other than the meeting specified in
the by-laws of the lodge ; and no adjourned or called meeting
shall be considered to be part of said stated meeting. — Const.
Cat.

Adjourning a lodge is irregular. A masonic lodge should
be closed, or the craft should be called from labor to refresh-
ment.— G. M. ofN. H., 1850.

Adjourning a lodge is unmasonic— English, C. F. C. Ark.,
1850.

We consider the practice of calling off from one date to
another, as wrong in principle, needless and bad in practice,
and, so far as our information extends, a modern innovation. —
Chase, Mas. Jour., 1857.

There can be no adjournment of the lodge to another day ;
nor can it be called off beyond the same day and evening. It
may be closed to stand closed until a particular day, &c. —
Reg. Ark.

It is highly irregular and unusual, and productive of great
confusion. — Morris.

We have before us manuscript records, running back to
within sixteen years of the reorganization of Masonry in Eng-
land, in 1717, when the present governmental system was
adopted, and the lodges brought more immediately under the
rule of written laws ; and there is not a single instance of a
meeting being held, whether regular or special, in which the
record does not specify that the lodge was "regularly
opened." There is no record of the lodge being " called on "
at the beginning, nor is there any of its being " called off" at
the close of the evening. If the business before it was not
finished, for want of time, it was deferred, and the lodge was
" closed " until the next stated meeting. If the business was
pressing, the Master aud Wardens were authorized to call a

THE MASTER CALLING OFF. 393

meeting on a " by-night ;" i. e., on an intermediate night, when
the lodge was regularly opened. This was the practice of
the early fathers of Masonry in this country. It is the prac-
tice of their immediate successors at the present day. We
have never witnessed any other, though it seems a different
rule has obtained in gome sections of the country.

Galling off, from one date to another, is clearly not war-
ranted by the usages of Masonry, as practiced by the early
lodges of England, and by the first lodges in this country. —
C. W. Moore, F. Mag., xii., 290.

I believe the practice of " calling off " from time to time,
beyond the day of meeting, prevails pretty generally, now.
in the United States. I have always regarded it as an inno-
vation, if not upon the ancient landmarks, at least upon the
custom of our old Masters.

As I view this matter, the calling off from day to day of a
Grand Lodge is proper. The Grand Lodge is only the crea-
ture of its subordinates, and it being a representative body,
it may adopt rules of proceedings that would be decidedly
out of place in a subordinate lodge. — B. B. French, Mas. Jour.,
1857.

A Committee of the Grand Council of Mississippi, in speak-
ing of the by-laws of a subordinate council, say: "Article
. . . . , authorizes the calling off, from a stated meeting to any
other convenient time. This your committee deem improper,
holding that each stated meeting should be closed in due
form, though a special meeting may be called for the transac-
tion of such business proper to be attended to at a called
meeting."

The Committee on Dispensations and Charters of the Grand
Council of Ohio, in their report, speak of the proceedings of
a certain council as " defective and objectionable, in that said
council appears to have been opened on February 1st, 1856,
and still continues open, (Oct. 15th, 1856.) This continuation
of a meeting, from time to time, during a long period, with-
out going through the formalities of opening and closing,
17*

394 THE MASTER CALLING OFF.

your committee deem unmasonic and reprehensible." — Mas,
Jour., 1857.

No stated meeting can be called off beyond the day and
night in which it was opened, and the lodge must be reg-
ularly closed before the brethren disperse. — Standard By-
laws Ky., 1854. Standard By-laws Me., 1857.

The Grand Master (Dunlap) announced it as his opinion,
that the practice of calling off lodges, from date to date, was
unmasonic ; and, that although the Grand Lodge was a re-
presentative body, yet as it " ought to set good examples for
its subordinates," and that he should " close the Grand Lodge
at the end of each day's labor, unless, by vote, he was re-
quested to do otherwise," it was voted that he "be re-
quested to call off from day to day, until the business of the
session was finished." — Pro. Gr. Lodge Me. Mas. Jour., 1857.

The question of " calling off a lodge " to a future day, has
also been presented. My instruction has been, that a lodge
cannot be regularly " called off " beyond the day on which it
meets. I find in all the old records to which I have had ac-
cess, that all lodges have been invariably closed before the
brethren separated. Masonic usage, as practiced in the
earlier days of the order, would, therefore, discountenance
this practice. I would also suggest, in this connection, that
as " calling off" simply implied a suspension of labor for a
short time, for refreshment, previous to completing the work, it
cannot justify a calling off to act upon business that was not
known of at the time of the first meeting; and, if done, amounts
io an adjournment of the lodge, which has been condemned as
unmasonic, by all masonic writers within my knowledge. —
Murray, D. D. G. M. of Me., 1857.

The Committee on Charters and Dispensations of the Grand
Lodge of Mississippi, for 1856, report the practice of calling
off from day to day, instead of closing, as irregular.

Resolved, That in the opinion of this Grand Chapter, the
practice of opening chapters, and calling off and on from one
meeting to another, instead of closing the chapter, is highly

THE MASTER — CALLING OFF. 395

improper, and contrary to the ancient customs and usage s-
Gr. Chap. Ky., 1857. C. F. C. Md., 1857. Do. Mo., 1858.

A lodge should never adjourn, but close; for, to adjourn, is
something unknown to Masonry. A lodge cannot call ojf from
one regular or monthly meeting to another. When it has
work on hand which may require repeated meetings, it may
there call off from one meeting to another, until the work
is completed, and then close (and not adjourn) in the usual
manner.— Bain, of N. C, 1858.

A Grand Lodge can adjourn from day to day, during the
session; but must close at the end of it. A subordinate
lodge can adjourn from one stated regular meeting to any pe-
riod before the next, or to the next regular meeting. Such> at
least, is the rule in this jurisdiction. — Hatch, C. F. C. of
N. Y., 1851.

All authorities agree, that at a called off meeting, nothing
can be done but the unfinished business of the former ses-
sion.— Morris, Am. 1. M., iii., 33.

A lodge cannot adjourn its stated meetings beyond the day
or evening fixed by the by-laws. All other meetings are
special meetings. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev., xvii., 320.

At any meeting to which a lodge may be called off, only
such business shall be transacted as originated on the day of
the stated meeting, and could not then be finished. Such
business must be specified on the minutes, and announced to
the members when the lodge is called off. — Reg. Miss.

The duty of closing a lodge is as imperative as that of open-
ing.— A.non., Fm. Mag., 1849.

Adjourning, or calling off from labor to refreshment, from
time to time, and calling such subsequent communications a
continuation of the stated, is irregular, and contrary to the
spirit of the institution. — Lee, Mich., 1852.

Jn the opinion of this Grand Lodge, the practice of " call-
ing off" a subordinate lodge from one date to another, is not
in acco rdance with ancient masonic usage, is productive of

396 THE MASTER — CALLING OFF.

much evil, and should be discontinued in lodges where it has
been practiced, and discountenanced by all, being unmasonic.
— Res. Maine, 1857.

My opinion has been, and is yet, that adjournments were
unknown in ancient Masonry, and not used by subordinate
lodges until in latter times. — Hubbard, G. M. Ohio, 1851.

On motion: Resolved, That the Grand Lodge will adjourn
sine die, on Friday next. — Extract from Pro. Ind., 1857.

It is unmasonic to adjourn a lodge ; it must be closed or
called off.— Ind., 1858.

The practice of adjourning a stated meeting to another day,
and calling this adjourned meeting a stated one, and allowing
balloting for candidates, and all other business of a stated
meeting to be done on the adjourned day, is a violation of the
spirit of our Constitution Lee, G. M. Mick., 1848.

In the opinion of this Grand Lodge, the terms " adjourned,"
" met by appointment," " called off for two weeks," (or any
other time, except for actual refreshment,) are unknown to
Masonry, and should not be used in masonic lodges.— Res.
Min., 1857.

The word adjourn, we believe to be unknown in Masonry.
—C.F. C. ofR. I., 1858.

A lodge must be closed before the period of each stated
meeting. — Iowa, 1851.

* Calling off from time to time, instead of closing the lodge,
is not correct. — Ky., 1857.

It is improper to call off instead of closing. — Mo., 1858.

There can be no adjournment of a lodge to another day ;
nor can it be called off beyond the same day or evening. It
may be closed, to stand closed until a particular day. — Reg
Ark.

Stated meetings should be closed within the twenty-four
hours fixed by the by-laws for stated meetings. Irregular to
call them off.— Texas, 1858.

THE MASTER — SPECIAL MEETINGS. 397

Adjournment is a term not recognized in Masonry. Lodges
are either closed, or called from labor to refreshment. In the
latter case, the lodge is still supposed to be open, and may
resume its labors at any time indicated by the Master. —
Mackey, P. ML L., 147.

No meeting can be continued after its members separate ;
and they should never separate without first closing their
lodge. Calling off until the next evening, or the next week,
and considering the latter a continuation of the stated meet-
ing, is wrong — radically wrong. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev.

It is held by our best writers that, a lodge called off to a
day or night subsequent, is not so much a part of the original
meeting as to be called stated or regular. Nothing can be
done at a called-off meeting which cannot be done at a called
meeting. Such a thing as calling off from one day to another,
ought not to be tolerated in any masonic body. It is irreg-
ular, and contrary to the symbolism of Masonry. — Morris,
Am. F. M., v., 02.

Special Meetings.

The meetings, or communications, of a lodge, are of two
kinds, viz : the regular monthly meetings provided for and
required by the by-laws, and those occasional meetings called
from time to time, for special purposes. The first named art-
termed "stated"* communications, and the latter, "special1'
communications.

It is a well-settled rule, that no business can be transacted
at a special meeting, except that for which it was specially
called, and which should, in all cases, be specified in the no-
tifications for the meeting.

Petitions for degrees, or for membership, cannot be re-
ceived or acted upon at a special meeting ; therefore, no bal-
lot can be taken at such meeting.

Every member should be duly notified of each and every
special meeting of his lodge, and of the business to be done,
or acted upon.

* Or "Regular."

398 THE MASTER — SPECIAL MEETINGS.

No lodge can, at a special meeting, alter or expunge any
part of the proceedings of a stated one. — Consts. Me., Mass.,
and Md.

No petition for initiation, or for membership, can be re-
ceived, nor ballot had thereon, at any special communication
of any lodge, except on dispensation. — Res. Me., 1858.

It is not in order to present a petition for the initiation of
a member at an adjourned meeting. — Hubbard, G. M. Ohio,

1851.

A lodge of emergency* may, at any time, be called by the
authority of the Master, or, in his absence, by the Senior
"Warden ; but, on no pretense, without such authority first
given. The particular reason of calling a lodge of emergency
shall be expressed in the summons, and afterwards recorded
in the minutes, and no business but that so expressed shall
be entered upon at such meetings. — Const. G. L. Eng.

No candidate for initiation shall be proposed, balloted for,
or made a mason, at a special lodge. — Const. N. H.

No subordinate lodge shall have power to suspend tempo-
rarily any of the provisions of its by-laws, nor alter or amend
the same, unless such suspension, alteration, or amendment,
shall have been proposed and entered on the records of the
lodge, at a previous regular communication ; and in no case
shall any such proposed suspension, alteration or amendment,
be acted upon, except at a regular communication. — lb.

No petition for initiation shall be received by any lodge,
except at a regular communication. — Const. Vt.

No business can be transacted at an extra meeting other
than that for which it was called ; nor can such meeting re-
ceive petitions, ballot, or engage in any other business
affecting the general interests of the craft. The presence of
Grand officers warrant exceptions. — Const. N. C.

No lodge can, at an extra meeting, alter or expunge the
proceedings of a regular meeting. — Mackey. Const. S. C.

* Special meeting — B. W. C.

THE MASTER — SPECIAL MEETINGS. 399

No lodge shall, in occasional meetings, alter, change, 01
destroy, any of the regulations passed at a stated meeting. —
Const. Ga.

No subordinate lodge can, at a called meeting, alter, amend,
or rescind, any part of the proceedings adopted at a regular
meeting. — Const. Fta. Do. D. C.

At no special meeting shall any other business be trans-
acted than the reading and approval of the minutes, granting
charity, or the conferring of degrees, except such business as
the lodge may have been especially called to consider. —
Const. La.

All applications for initiation, or membership, shall be
made at a regular stated meeting of the lodge, and lie over,
at least, from one stated communication to another. — Consts.
Ohio and lnd.

No lodge can receive, refer, or act upon a petition for ini-
tiation or membership, or ballot for initiates, officers, or mem-
bership ; or adopt any resolution affecting the by-laws of the
lodge, at any other than a stated communication. No lodge
can, at a special meeting, alter or expunge any part of the
proceedings of a stated one. — Const. Min.

In Iowa, a petition for initiation, or membership, cannot be
received or acted on, nor ballot had thereon, except at a
stated meeting ; and ballots for advancement must also be had
at stated meetings only.

No lodge shall receive any petition for initiation or mem-
bership, except upon the day of the stated monthly meeting
thereof ; and no ballot shall be taken on any such petition at
any other than a stated monthly meeting. — Consts. Mo. and
Kansas.

Nor at a special meeting alter or amend any proceedings
of a stated meeting. — Ibid.

All petitions for initiation shall be presented in a regular
meeting, and shall lie over until the next regular meeting.—
Const. Texas.

400 THE MASTER — SPECIAL MEETINGS.

All applications for initiation or membership, shall be
made in writing, at a stated meeting of the lodge ; but shall
not be acted upon until after the expiration of four weeks,
and then only at a stated meeting. — Consts. Cal. and Oregon.

No business can be done at special meetings, save that
specific business for which the lodge was called, or adjourned.
— C. Moore, Mas. Rev., viii., 368.

A lodge of emergency may be called at any time, by sum-
mons, giving seven clear days' notice, by the authority of the
Master, or, in his absence, of the Senior Warden, or, in his
absence, of the Junior Warden ; but on no pretense without
such authority. The particular reason for calling the lodge
of emergency shall be expressed in the summons, and after-
wards recorded on the minutes ; and no business but that so
expressed shall be entered upon at such meeting. — Const. Ca.

No lodge may exclude or suspend a brother at an extra
meeting. — Const. Venn.

No special communication shall be held without sufficient
notice being first given, as far as practicable, of the time and
objects of the meeting; and it shall not be lawful for the
lodge to transact any business other than that for which the
lodge was specially convened. — Const. Ala.

Receiving or acting upon a petition for initiation, at a meet-
ing specially called for that purpose, is highly improper and
Tinmasonic. — Ky., 1822.

The Master of this lodge, or, in his absence, the Grand
Master, Depmty Grand Master, or Wardens, when there is a
private lodge ordered to be held for a making, shall be
obliged to give all the members timely notice of the time and
place, in writing, where such lodge is held, that they may
give their attendance. — By-law o/1733.

Any person or persons being balloted in, may be made on
a private night, by dispensation from the Master or Wardens.

Petitions for membership must be presented, reported on

THE MASTER SPECIAL MEETINGS. 401

and balloted for, at a stated meeting. — Fenton, G. M. Mich.t
1859.

No candidate shall be made in a private lodge* unless
summonses are issued out in due time, by the Master and
Wardens, and sent (as far as may be) to each member then in
Portsmouth, notifying the time and place of such meeting. —
By-law of \1 39.

"We think that petitions can be presented at a called meet-
ing ; but that they cannot be referred or acted on, except at a
regular stated meeting. — Hatch, C. F. C, N. Y., 1851.

No business shall be transacted by such special meeting
but that for which it was called. — Standard By-laws, N. Y.,
1858.

Degrees may be conferred at special meetings, but no other
business shall be transacted except that specified in the sum-
mons.— Reg. Miss. Reg. Ark.

We deem it neither right nor lawful for a lodge to transact,
at a called meeting, any other business than that for which it
has been convened. — C. "W. Moore, 1846.

Grand Lodges have generally deemed it wise to prescribe,
that a candidate shall not be proposed at a special meeting,
nor initiated at such meeting, unless he has been proposed,
stood the required time, and been admitted at a previous
stated meeting. — lb., 1850.

A Master cannot call special meetings of his lodge, with-
out notifying all its members. — lb.

It is generally conceded that ballotings should be had at
stated meetings only, except by dispensation, and on due no
tice to members. — G. M. Cat., 1857.

The business to be transacted (at a special meeting) shall
be expressed in the summons, recorded on the minutes, and
no other business shall be entered upon. — Const. Eng.

No lodge shall ballot for conferring any degree, or approve

* u Private Lodge," in these old by-laws means any other meeting than the
stated meeting.

402 THE MASTEK — SPECIAL MEETINGS.

its records, at any other than a stated meeting. — Res. Cal^
1854.

No lodge can, at a special meeting, alter or amend any pro-
ceedings of a stated meeting. — Const. Kansas.

No business should be done at a called meeting, except the
business for which it was called ; and the business should be
stated in the summons. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1852. Com. Juris,
do, G. Lodge do.

In calling special meetings of a lodge, each member ought
to have notice. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

If a stated meeting be closed, to stand closed until some
subsequent day, and afterward a meeting is opened on the
same day, the last is a special meeting. — lb.

Our Grand Lodge prohibits a ballot being taken for initia-
tion at a special meeting. — G. M. 111., 1855.

No ballot, on any subject, can be had at a called meeting.
— Hartsock, G. M. Iowa, 1859.

It is well settled law, that petitions for initiation can only
be received, and ballots had thereon, at a stated monthly
meeting. — Iowa, 1851.

Wrong to ballot for advancement at special meetings. —
Iowa, 1855.

Improper to act upon a petition for affiliation at any other
than a stated meeting. — Res. Texas, 1851.

No special communication can alter or amend the proceed-
ings of a regular one. — Mackey, P. M. L., 140.

A petition for initiation must be read and referred at a
stated communication. The report on the petition cannot be
made at a special communication. — Mackey, P. M. L., 187.

No person shall be made a mason, without a regular prop-
osition at one lodge, and a ballot at the next stated lodge.—
Const. Eng.

A ballot should not be taken at a special meeting. — Mor-
ris, Am. F. M., ii., 31.

THE MASTER — EMERGENCIES. 403

No balloting, on any subject, can be done at a called meet-
mg.—~lbid., iii., 65,

All business of the lodge, except burying the dead, ano*
elections, must originate at stated meetings. All balloting
on petitions for initiation, advancement, or membership, must
be done at stated meetings. — Standard By-laws, Ky., 1854.

Balloting cannot be done except at a stated lodge. — By-laws,
1757. J. W. S. Mitchell, 1856.

Emergencies.

The general rule in Masonry is, that a candidate for the
degrees must stand one month, before he can be admitted ;
and then cannot receive more than two degrees on the same
day, except by dispensation. When the urgency of a case
seems to require that such previous notice be dispensed
with, or that the candidate be allowed to receive the three
degrees at one meeting, or both, as where he is bound on a
voyage to sea, or on a long journey, such case is called, tech-
nically, a case of emergency. In strictness, the Grand Master,
or the one acting as such in his absence, is sole judge of what
constitutes a case of emergency ; but in several jurisdictions,
the power is granted to other Grand officers, and in some, to
the subordinate lodges.*

From a perusal of old by-laws and records, we conclude,
that in the last century, in New England, the Master and
Wardens of each lodge usually decided such cases ; but at
present, it may be considered as a matter of Grand Lodge
regulation, and that each Grand Lodge may prescribe rules
for its own jurisdiction.

In the opinion of this Grand Lodge, the desire of any per-
son to be made a mason, because he wishes to travel, is no
reason for considering it a case of emergency, and is not a
sufficient reason for granting a dispensation to confer degrees
out of the usual course. — Res. N. H., 1857.

Resolved, That no lodge has a right to initiate a candidate
unless his petition has been presented at a stated commu«
* See "Dispensations for Degrees."

404 THE MASTER— EMERGENCIES.

nication of such lodge, at least one month before, without u
dispensation from the Grand Master, who is the sole judge of
what state of facts constitute a case of emergency. — Va., 1856.

There can arise no emergency before petition made, and a
favorable ballot thereon ; as until then, the fraternity are in
no wise related or bound to the candidate. But after the
election to the degrees, or the receiving of one of them, it
may occur, that the exigencies of the candidate call for more
speedy initiation or advancement, as the unexpected change
of location, or the sudden invasion of disease. An emer-
gency, thus denned, cannot be created, by the act of the
candidate, except it be, where he, in good faith, intends to
change his residence to a distant locality, after election or a
degree had.— Rice, D. G. M. Geo., 1856.

No lodge is at liberty to establish emergent cases. — Morris,,
Am, F. M., iii., 73.

According to the Constitution of Nebraska, three-fourths
of the members present may decide any application to be a
case of emergency.

The word emergency, should be stricken from the masonic
language, if, indeed, it is masonic. — Pierson, G. M. Min., 1858.

Petitions shall lie over at least from one stated meeting to
another, unless by a vote of three- fourths of the members
present, they shall be regarded cases of emergency ; in which
case, by a unanimous vote, a ballot may be had. — Standard
By-laws, Ohio, 1855. Bo. Ark., 1857.

The above doctrine is strongly condemned by the C. F. C.
of D. C, (Whiting), 1856; and by that of Iowa, (Parvin), for
1857, as a "violation of a fundamental principle."

The lodge must be the judge of what is, and what is not a
case of emergency. No cases of personal favor, whether to
the lodge or the applicant, should ever be deemed cases of
emergency. If a worthy person is suddenly called upon to
visit distant lands, to embark in war, in defense of his

THE MASTER — BUSINESS. 405

country, &c, and cannot wait, these would be proper cases.—*
Hu3Bi.kd, Ohio, 1851.

The Grr,nd Lodge of South Carolina reserves to itself the
right to judge of what are cases of emergency. — G-. W. C.

The practice of balloting, on the evening the petition is
received, is a direct violation of a fundamental principle of
Ancient Craft Masonry.— C. F. C. of N. C, 1855.

Cases of emergency warranting haste in acting on a peti-
tion for initiation, muet be real, not imaginary. There must
be a necessity for immediate action. — Ark., 1855.

Special dispensations to make masons, without the petition
laying over one month, are an abominable abuse of power.—
G. M. o/N. J., 1855.

No proper case of emergency can arise, unless the appli-
cant is about to remove beyond the jurisdiction of the lodge.
—bid., 1855.

I am strongly impressed with the belief, that the interests
and permanency of the order would be greatly advanced by
a total abrogation of the dispensing power. — Anderson, G.
M. Ill, 1855.

Subordinate lodges in Kentucky have not the power of
deciding what are cases of emergency. — Morris, Am. F. M.,
ii., 187.

I think a lodge has the right to hold emergent meetings,
whenever the interest of the order calls for them ; but I
utterly deny that it has the right to hold an emergent meet-
ing, for the accommodation of one who is not a mason. — J.
W. S. Mitchell, 1855.

Business.
The general rule now is, that all business, except conferring
the first and second degrees, must be transacted while the
lodge is opened on the master mason's degree. This rule,
however, is quite a modern one. We have carefully examined
the records of many old lodges, and find that the prevailing

406 THE MASTER— BUSINESS.

custom among them was, to transact general business in any
degree upon which they chanced to be open, when th^ busi-
ness was brought forward, and to ballot for degrees when
open on the degree to which the candidate asked to be ac -
mitted. This we believe to have been the general usag .
until within a very few years.

We have before us the records of a lodge, from 1^75 to
1791, during which time the third degree was only conferred
in a " Master's lodge," the minutes of which are separate,
(and the officers, in part, different persons) frc m the lodge in
which were conferred the degrees cf E. A. and F. C. We
have also full notes taken by ourself, from the records of a
lodge, from 1739 to the present time, in which lodge the third
degree was not conferred at all until 1750; and then only on
one occasion, when five brothers were " made Masters " on
board a ship in the harbor. The next raising was in 1756.
These are recorded as " A Master's lodge, convened on spe-
cial occasion." From 1759 to 1790, a separate record-book
was kept for the master's lodge. No business, except raising,
was done in the latter. All the general business was trans-
acted in what the record styles, the " Fellow Craft's Lodge."

No business, other than that appertaining to the work and
lectures, shall be transacted in a lodge, while open on the
first or second degree. All general business, such as the
election and installation of officers, the discussion of questions
relating to the general interests of the fraternity, and the
local affairs of the lodge, shall be transacted in a master's
lodge. — Consts. Mass., Me. and Wis.

No business other than conferring the degrees in the re-
spective lodges, and giving the instruction peculiar to such
lodges respectively, can be transacted in an entered appren-
tice or fellow craft's lodge. — Hubbard, G. M. Ohio, 1851.

Elections, and all other business and work, are done in a
master mason's lodge, excepting only such business or work
as shall strictly belong to the lesser degrees. — Const. Penn.

No business shall be transacted in any other than a master's

THE MASTER — BUSINESS. 407

lodge, excepting only such as pertains especially to the work
and lectures of the E. A. or F. C. degrees. — Const. N. C.

All ballotings for candidates, and trials of brethren, must
take place in the third degree. — Comts. S. C. and Geo.

All business must be transacted in the lodge when opened
in the third degree, except that which relates especially to
the conferring and lecturing in the subordinate degrees. —
Coasts. Fla. and D. C.

All the proceedings, ballotings and business of the lodges,
shall be had in a lodge of master masons, that of conferring
the inferior degrees alone excepted. — Consts. Ohio and Indiana.

All the business of the lodge, except that of conferring
degrees, and the instruction thereon, shall be transacted in a
lodge on the third degree. — Const. Iowa.

The lodges shall elect their officers in the third degree of
Masonry. — Const. Ky.

All business of lodges, except the initiation or passing
of candidates, shall be transacted in the third degree of
Masonry. — lb id.

No work, or other business of the craft, shall be performed
in any otheT than the master's degree, except lecturing, ex-
amination of candidates, and conferring the previous degrees.
— Const. Mo.

All discussions, and all ballotings, shall be in a master's
lodge ; and no business shall be transacted in a lodge of
entered apprentices or fellow crafts, but such as appertains
to the degree. — Const. Texas.

All the proceedings, ballotings, and business of the lodge,
except that of conferring subordinate degrees, shall be had
and done in a lodge of master masons. — Consts. Cal and
Oregon.

All ballotings for candidates and for membership, should
be had in a master mason's lodge. — Res. Me., 1850.

All business, except that which relates specially to t^a «ub-

408 THE MASTER — BUSINESS.

ordinate degrees, shall be transacted in the lodge sitting in
the third degree. — Const. Md.

The Committee appointed at the last meeting, to take into
consideration a communication from the Grand Lodge of
Missouri, making inquiries as to the opinion of this Grand
Lodge, upon the propriety of discussing the general affairs
of the fraternity, in .subordinate lodges, when open on any
other than the master's degree, submitted the following re-
port, which was unanimously accepted, viz : That so far as
their information extends, it has been the universal practice
of the lodges under this jurisdiction, to discuss all matters
relative either to the fraternity at large, or to their own par
ticular lodge, (observing, of course, a proper distinction as
to technicalities), without any reference as to which of the
three degrees they may be open upon at the time ; and your
committee are not aware that any evils have resulted from
this practice. — Mass., 1841.

We greatly doubt the antiquity of the usage that requires
all ballotings to be had in a master's lodge. It certainly
was net known, when all the lodges were composed of fellow
crafts and entered apprentices spoke and voted in general
assembly. It seems to us, on reason, and in justice also,
that the rule should be otherwise. Let the other work be
done in a master's lodge. — Pike, C. F. C. Ark., 1854.

All business of a lodge must be transacted in the master's
degree, for the reasons, that none below that degree have a
right to know what is done in a master's lodge ; and mem-
bers of a lodge, that is, master masons, can only participate
in its business.— Lewis, G. M. of N. Y., 1858.

Entered apprentices are masons, and by ancient Usage were
members of lodges. It was only in this country, and not
here generally, if we are correctly informed, until after the
Baltimore Convention, in 1843, that they were ousted of the
latter right, by a resolution, that the business of the lodge
should be conducted in the third degree only. This, we
think, is wrong. — Lawrence, C. F. C. of Geo., 1856,

THE MASTER — BUSINESS. 409

All the proceedings, ballotings and business of the lodges,
shall be had in a lodge of master masons, that of conferring
the inferior degrees alone excepted. — Const. Neb. C. F. C.
of Fla., 1850.

There is great impropriety in transacting the business of
the chapter in a lodge of mark masters. — C. W. Moore, 1847.

All work and business must be done in master's lodge,
except lecturing, examination of candidates for advancement,
conferring E. A. and F. C. degrees, and reception of testimony
on trial of E. A. or F. C.—Reg. Term., 1857.

It is improper to transact any masonic business in any
lodge below the degree of master mason, except conferring
the inferior degrees, and instruction appertaining thereto. —
Washington Convention, 1842.

I believe it to be as indispensable for a master's lodge to be
opened, in order to work the intermediate degrees, as it is
for a lodge to have a charter. — G. M. CaL, 1853. We do not
so believe.— C. F. C. Iowa, 1854.

All the business of the lodge should be done in the master's
degree, except the giving of lectures and conferring of de-
grees.—C. F. C. La., 1854.

Lodges are recommended to do all their business in a
lodge of master masons, except conferring the first and sec-
ond degrees. — Reg. 111.

Lodges of entered apprentices and fellow crafts, shall be
opened only for the purpose of instruction, and of conferring
those degrees. — Res. Ky., 1847.

The " work" of Masonry takes precedence of all other
business. — Mackey, P. 31. L., 142.

We are of opinion, that the true masonic law is, that none
can transact the business of a lodge, except the members,
and that no one can be a member until he be a master mason.
C. F. C. of R. I., 1858.
. 18

410 THE MASTER — IRREGULAR WORK.

Irregular "Work.

A body of masons, or pretended masons, meeting as a
lodge, without a legal warrant or dispensation, is termed a
" clandestine" body, or lodge ; and work done by them is
termed " clandestine work." A regular mason cannot visit,
or hold masonic communication with such body or its mem-
bers, or with its initiates, under the severest penalties.

When a regular lodge, either chartered or under dispen-
sation, does work in violation of the constitution of its Grand
Lodge, or the usages and landmarks of Masonry, such work
is termed " irregular."

A person irregularly made, cannot be refused recognition
as a clandestine mason. He was made in a regular lodge, and
if any punishment is to be inflicted, it must be upon the
lodge making him.

If a regular lodge initiate a man belonging to the juris-
diction of another lodge, or a blind man, such work is
irregular, and the lodge is amenable to punishment ; but the
person so made cannot be refused recognition as a mason.

We do not see how a brother who has received the degrees
in a regular lodge, and in a proper manner, can be regarded
as a clandestine mason. The cause of complaint must lie
with much greater force against the lodge that received him.
-C. W. Moore, 1849.

Subordinate lodges are recommended not to recognize as
masons, those who have knowingly and willfully gone out of
the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, for the purpose of ob-
taining the degrees in a foreign jurisdiction.* But when a
person has received the degrees in a foreign jurisdiction,
without knowing that he, and the lodge confirming them,
was violating the usages of Masonry, he should be, if other-
wise worthy, recognized as a brother. — Ohio, 1843.

* A regulation, similar to the foregoing, was adopted by Maryland, in 1848.

THE MASTER — IRREGULAR WoRK. 411

Whatever we may think of the inexpediency of making
transient persons, * * * the person thus made cannot
be called a clandestine mason, because he has been made in
?. legally constituted lodge; and as he is a regular mason, we
know of nc principle by which he can be refused admission
as a visitor into any lodge to which he applies. — Mackey, P.
M. L. 236.

Any lodge may do irregular work, but none but a clandestine
lodge, (that is, one having no legal charter),, can do clandestine
work. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 124.

If a candidate has been improperly made a mason in a
lodge of good standing, he should not be declared by any
other lodge a clandestine mason, or be disfranchised without
a fair trial. He is not to be censured for the improper act
of the lodge that initiated him. — Haswell, C. F. C. Vt., 1851.

How should masons be treated who are made in a foreign
state ? Some of the Grand Lodges have advanced the opinion,
that they should be treated as clandestine masons. Now this
appears to us to be improper. It is punishing a mason for
what he was not, and could not, from the nature of the case,
be guilty. If there was blame anywhere in the case, it was
in the lodge which initiated him, and not in the individual. —
C. F. C. of R. L, 1850.

This evil has been greatly increased by persons who have
been rejected by the lodges where they reside, going tem-
porarily into other states and there receiving the degrees,
and then returning to their places of residence, entitled to
all the rights and benefits of Masonry. They could not be
said to be clandestine, and hence the craft were compelled to
submit to this injury. — Hill, G. M. Ala., 1854.

We agree with the Grand Lodge of New York, that a man
made a mason in any legally constituted lodge, cannot be de-
clared a clandestine mason, or refused the rights and benefits
of the order. The fault is in the lodge initiating him, and it
alone should be amenable. — C. F. C. of Fla.f 1850.

4 12 THE MASTER — CHASTER — PRESENCE OP.

The Charter.

ITS PRESENCE IN THE LODGE, &C.

The Master has special charge of the charter of his Iodg3:
and, according to the general rule, it should always be present
when the lodge is opened. There is a strong array of au-
thority for the opinion, that if the charter be lost, or destroyed,
or for any cause be not present, the lodge cannot be opened.
We acknowledge our inability to see the consistency or ne-
cessity of such a rule, in its strictness. The charter should
always be present in the lodge, for obvious reasons ; but if
lost, or destroyed, we are of opinion that the lodge need
not cease its labors, and that the Grand Master may, in such
case, order a duplicate copy to be furnished the lodge. The
charter is not the only, or the best, evidence of the legality
and good standing of a lodge.

The Master of a lodge has the special charge of its char-
ter, and it is his duty to see that it is carefully preserved.
It must be present when the lodge is opened. — Consts. Me.
and Mass.

A lodge cannot be opened unless the dispensation or charter
be present, which are considered to be under the special
charge of the Master. — Const. N. C.

The charter is not so much a certificate as it is a warrant
of power. It is at once the authority and the evidence of its
rightfulness. The propriety of its presence all admit. Though
the weight of authority is found in favor of its actual pres-
ence, it can hardly matter much, providing it be actually in
possession of the Master, and ready to be produced in case
of necessity. — Hillyer, G. M. Miss., 1855.

No lodge can be opened, or proceed to business, unless it
be present. If it be mislaid or destroyed, it must be recov-
ered, or another obtained ; and, until that is done, the com-
munications of the 1 ^dge must be suspended ; and if the
warrant of constitution be taken out of the room, during the
session of the lodge, the authority of the Master instantly
ceases. — Mackey, Lexicon 537.

THE MASTER CHARTER — PRESENCE OF. 413

The Masier has the special charge of the warrant of con-
stitution, which must always be in the lodge when it is
opened, and during its labors. — Const. Perm.

The charter of a lodge is in the special charge of the
Master, and it is his duty carefully to preserve it, and have
the same in the lodge whenever it is opened. — Con4. D. C.

Viewed as an ordinary rule of practice, the charter should
be present in the hall when the lodge is assembled for work.
* * * The charter holds to the lodge the same relation
that the act of the legislature holds to the body it incorpo-
rates. And it will hardly be said, that the absence of the
original from the office where the business is transacted,
suspends the powers of the corporation. The loss of the
title deed would not deprive the grantee of his right of pos-
session and occupancy, the evidence of that right being sus-
ceptible of proof from the record. We think, therefore, that
the G. H. P. of Arkansas took the true view of the matter,
when he instructed the chapter, (whose charter had been
destroyed by fire), to apply to the Grand Secretary for an
authentic copy of the lost charter, and in the meantime to
continue its labors as though it were actually in possession
of the presiding officer. — C. W. Moore.

That the charter should be present as evidence to protect
visiting brethren, we cannot doubt ; but that the acts of the
lodge would be invalidated by its absence, as claimed by
Bro. Mackey, we cannot agree. The Master holds it for the
lodge, and his possession is the possession of the lodge ; and
whether in the bureau of one officer (at his house), or the
desk of another, (in the lodge room), it is in the constructive
possession of the lodge. — Mellen, Acacia, 1855.

I do not believe that the charter is the authority, but
merely the evidence of vested authority, and its presence is
not indispensable. — Gray, Miss. Acacia, 1855.

Without the charter no lodge can be opened. — Morris, Am.
F. M., xi., 115.

414 THE MASTER MASONIC BURIALS.

The cl .arter, or dispensation, being lost, the lodge cannot
be opened. — Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

If a lodge lo&s its charter by fire, and receives a dispensa-
tion in its place, it has no powers beyond those of any lodge
under dispensatio 1. If the charter is lost, they are no longer
a chartered ledge until they get a new charter. — Morris, Am.
F. M., iii., 129.

Masonic Burials.

No one can be interred with the formalities of the order,
unless he be a master mason. From this rule there is no
exception. Entered apprentices and fellow crafts cannot,
therefore, be buried with masonic honors under any circum-
stances.*

The general rule is, that only those who have themselves
so requested, can be thus interred. The exceptions are, the
case of sojourners, and where the nearest relatives of the de-
ceased so request.

No mason can be interred with the formalities of the order,
unless it be at his own special request, communicated to the
Master of the lodge of which he died a member — foreigners
and sojourners excepted ; nor unless he has been advanced to
the third degree of Masonry ,f from which restriction there
can be no exception. Fellow crafts or apprentices are not
entitled to the funeral obsequies. — Preston, 1788: Webb,
1797; Const. Ky., 1818; Davis, 1850. Nor to attend the ma-
sonic procession on such occasions. — Webb, 1802, 1805, 1808,
1812,1816; Bradley, 1816; Cross, 1820, 1845, 1856 ; Gray,
1855; Macoy, 1853; Dove, 1854; S. C. Ahiman Rezon, 1852.

No mason can be interred with the formalities of the order,
unless he has been advanced to the third degree of Masonry.

* Non-affiliated masons are not entitled to masonic burial. See " Non-affiliated
Masons."

f To the above, the Ahiman Rezon of Pennsylvania, 1825, Cole's Ireemason't
TAbrary, and General Ahvnan Rezon, 1826, and Stewart's Manual, 1853, add,
(after foreigners and sojourners,) " and particular officers excepted, and those at
»he discretion of the Grand Master ;" and omit the subsequent sentence.

THE MASTER — MASONIC BURIALS.

415

Fellow-crafts and apprentices arc not entitled to funeral ob-
sequies, nor to attend the masonic processions on such occa-
sions.— C. W. Moore, (Trestle Board.)

Xo brother can be interred with the formalities of the
order, unless he has received the third degree in Masonry.
— C. Moore's Craftsman, 1852. And at the time of his decease
was a member in good standing in the order, unless by dis-
pensation from the Grand Master. — Ahiman Rezon, Penn., 1857.

A non-affiliated mason cannot be buried with masonic hon-
ors.— 31as. Register, 1802.

Whenever a master mason, in good standing, shall have
expressed his desire that the usual masonic burial service
shall be performed over his remains, or wThen his nearest rel-
atives, family, or friends request it, it shall be the duty of the
lodge to which he belonged, or (if a sojourning brother) in
whose jurisdiction he shall have died, to attend his funeral,
and perform the services. — Const. La.

Each subordinate lodge shall bury a deceased worthy
member of its body with masonic rites, if requested by the
decedent in his lifetime, or by his near relations after his
death ; in all other cases, such masonic honors may be
granted or withheld as the lodge may consider best. — Consts.
Ohio, hid., and Nebraska.

I also denied to the brethren of the lodge the right to ap-
pear as individuals in masonic costume ; deciding that no
number of brethren could accompany the body of a deceased
brother to the grave, as masons, in any other way than as a
lodge duly opened. — Rockwell, D. G. M. Ga., 1856. This
6eems to us correct. — Abell, C. F. C. CaL, 1858.

Masonic funerals are not of great antiquity ; neither is the
custom a universal one. In Germany, it is rarely observed ;
aud, in France, the service is generally performed in the
lodge-room, and only on particular occasions, as in case of the
death of the Master, or a brother of distinction. To entitle
one to masonic burial, he must be a master mason ; a member
cf the lodge, or a sojourner ; and if a member, he must hava

416 THE MASTER — MASONIC BURIALS.

communicated the request to the Master of the lodge before
his decease. A lodge is under no obligation whatever to
grant the request. — C. W. Moore, 1846.

As a general principle, a suicide is not entitled to masonic
burial ; but circumstances may arise, in which the matter
should be left to the discretion of the lodge in which it
happens. — Com. Juris. Va., 1855.

The Grand Lodge of Indiana, in 1844, prohibited members
of lodges from attending, as masons, the funeral of non-affili-
ated masons. — G. W. C.

It is at variance with the ancient usage, and a violation of
the ancient constitutions of Masonry, to open on any except
the third degree, on funeral occasions. — Iowa, 1847.

A fellow craft mason is not entitled to masonic burial. —
Swigert, G. M. Ky., 1858.

It would be an outrage upon public sentiment, and a pros-
titution of the masonic rites, to pay any masonic respect to
the remains of one who had committed suicide from deli-
rium tremens.— Morris, 1859. Most assuredly. — G. W. C.

Burial of a suicide discretionary with master of lodge. —
Jordan, G. M. Neb., 1858.

No one below the degree of master mason, shall be interred
with masonic honors, and the formalities of the order. It is
the duty of the lodge of which a brother is a member, or the
nearest lodge, to attend and perform the usual masonic burial
service over deceased master masons, when requested to do
so by the deceased, or his nearest relatives. — Const. Me.

None but master masons are entitled to membership
burial, or the general charity fund of the lodge. — Hubbard,
Ohio, 1851.

No mason can be interred with the formalities of the order,
unless it be at his own special request, without a dispen-
sation from the Grand Master ; nor under any circumstances,
unless he has been advanced to the degree of a master
mason. — Co ist. Mass. and Eng.

THE MASTER — ABRIDGMENT OF DEGREES. 417

To the above, "Wisconsin adds : " and at the time of his
death was a member of some regular lodge."

The regulation, as laid down by Preston, appears, by uni-
versal consent, to have been adopted as the general usage
In this country, dispensations for funeral processions are not
usually, if at all, required. — Mackey, P. 31. L., 271.

An entered apprentice, or fellow craft, cannot be buried
with masonic honors. — Morris, Am. F. 31, ii., 186.

A lodge may bury a non-affiliated mason with masonic
honors, if they choose ; but we are not one to join in such a
desecration of masonic honors. — Ibid., ii., 187.

A demitted mason is not entitled to masonic burial. — Ibid.,
iii., 1.

A brother who commits suicide should, by no means, be
buried with the honors of Masonry. — Ibid., iii., 105. In
which opinion we agree. — G. W. C.

Universal custom authorizes the Master to open his lodge
for funeral purposes, at the house of the deceased, or at a
house near by ; but the charter must be present.— Morris,
Am. F. M., iv., 68.

A suspended mason cannot be buried with masonic honors.
— C. Moore, Mas. Rev. xiii., 250.

Abridgment of Degrees.

A lodge has no right to abridge or omit any part of the
ceremonies or explanations belonging to any of the de-
grees, when conferring them upon a candidate. The can-
didate having complied with all the obligations and forms
required of him, is entitled to receive all that belongs to the
degree or degrees, and it is masonically and grossly unjust
to deprive him of any part thereof. " Want of time" is no
excuse, as a lodge has no right to undertake more work than
it can finish ; (as it is not compelled to undertake any work),
but having undertaken it, it is bound to complete it, and to
complete it in a workmanlike manner.

Resolved, That hereafter, no lodge shall be permitted, in
the conferring of a degree, to omit any part of the ceremonies,

18*

418 THE MASTER — DEGREES MUST BE IN FULL.

or lectures of the same, for any reason whatever. — Conn.,
1856.

Every word of every degree should be given to the can*
didate, and that, too, at the time he takes the degrees. —
Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 131.

In conferring the degrees, the lectures appertaining thereto
shall indispensably be delivered ; and it shall be considered
irregular, in the opening or closing of a lodge, to waive any
portion of the ceremonies. — Const. N. C.

No degree shall be conferred in any of the lodges subor-
dinate to this Grand Lodge, without giving the lecture be-
longing to the same during the same communication. — Ark.,
1855.

This is as it should be.— Bierce, C. F. C. of Ohio, 1856.

The lodges, in all cases of conferring degrees, shall deliver
the lecture appertaining to the degree conferred. — Const.

Kansas.

The degrees conferred without the lectures are incomplete,
and this Grand Lodge hereby requires the lectures to be
given. — Res. Cal., 1854. We are glad to see this resolution.
— Storer, C. F. C. of Conn., 1855.

In no case should the lecture be omitted at the time the
degree is conferred. — G. M. Ark., 1855. Bierce, C. F. C.
Ohio, 1856.

Lodges are required to give the degrees in full, together
with the lectures. — Reg. 111. Cal. and Miss.

Lodges shall, in all cases of conferring degrees, deliver at
the time, the lecture appertaining to the degree conferred. — •
Const. Iowa, 1844.

In every case the presiding officer shall give the lectures
appertaining to all the sections in each degree he may confer.
— Res. Tenn., 185a

THE MASTER — MASONIC PROCESSIONS. 419

Masonic Processions.

The general rule in relation to the formation of public pro-
cessions, by subordinate lodges, is, that no such procession
can be had without a special dispensation therefor, from the
Grand Master, or one of the principal Grand officers. But in
the absence of Grand Lodge regulation upon the subject,
lodges have the right to form public processions on funeral,
festival, (and, perhaps, other) occasions. Some of the Grand
Lodges permit the formation of public funeral processions,
without special dispensation, and others do not.

By express law of the Grand Lodge, no regular masons do
attend any public procession clothed, &c, unless a dispen-
sation be granted by a Grand Master, or Deputy, under a
forfeiture of all masonic rights. — Preston.

No lodge shall form a public procession, (funeral proces-
sions excepted), without permission from one of the first four
Grand officers, or the District Deputy Grand Master within
whose district it is located. — Const. Me.

Processions are entirely under the charge of the Grand
Lodge, or its Grand Master. Subordinate lodges have no
right to appear in procession without consent. — Mackey.

Resolved, That the subordinate lodges under the jurisdiction
of this Grand Lodge, are not allowed to hold public cele-
brations, or appear in public processions, as masons, without
first obtaining a dispensation from the Most Worshipful
Grand Master ; Provided, That nothing in this resolution shall
be so construed as to prevent the several lodges from per-
forming our usual funeral services within their own juris-
diction, whenever it becomes necessary or practicable. —
Iowa, 1849.

The Constitution of the Grand Lodge of New Hampshire
prohibits its subordinate lodges from celebrating the annual
festivals of the craft, by a public masonic procession, or to
have a public installation of officers, or to appear in public,
as a lodge, on any occasion, except funerals, without a dis-
pensation from the Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master, 01
its District Deputy Grand Master.

420 THE MASTER— MASONIC PROCESSIONS.

No lodge shall form a public procession, except for funeral
purposes, without permission in writing therefor from the
Grand Master, (or in his absence, the Deputy Grand Master),
or the District Deputy Grand Master, within whose district
it may be located. — Consts. Vt. and Ca.

No lodge shall form a public procession, without permis-
sion from the Grand Master, (or in his absence, the Deputy
Grand Master), or the District Deputy Grand Master within
whose district it is located. — Const. Mass.

There shall be no processions, but with the consent of two-
thirds of the members present at the meeting next preceding
the feast of St. John, when the same is to take place. And
no funeral procession shall be had, without notice given, and
leave granted from the highest Grand officer present, or the
Grand Lodge, if in session. In case no such officer be pres-
ent, or Grand Lodge in session, the lodge may proceed in the
usual manner. — Const. N. J.

No funeral, or other procession of a subordinate lodge in
regalia, shall be had without the approbation of the Grand
Master, or his substitute, upon the application of the Master
or presiding officer cf such lodge ; or where a brother shall
die, not being a member of any lodge, on the application of
five brethren. — Const. Venn.

No funeral procession of freemasons shall be formed in
Charleston, without a written permission from the Grand
Master, or presiding Grand officer. — Const. S. C.

No lodge shall form a public procession without permission
of the Grand Master, unless it be a funeral procession formed
by a single lodge. — Const. D. C.

There shall be no funeral or other procession of masons
under this jurisdiction, except by permission of a regularly
constituted lodge, or of the presiding officer thereof. — Const.
Mich.

Subordinate lodges are not allowed to hold public cele-
bration/}, or appear in public processions, as masons, (except

THE MASTER— WHO MAY JOIN IN MASONIC PROCESSIONS. 421

on funeral occasions), without first obtaining a dispensation
from Grand Lodge or from the Grand Master. — Const. Iowa.

Neither has a lodge under dispensation any authority to
hold processions, either on festivals, celebrations, or for
funeral purposes. — Hyam, G. M. Cat, 1853.

No public procession, for any purpose, can take place with-
out a dispensation, unless when a master mason dies in a
place too remote from the Grand Master, for the lodge of
which he was a member, to obtain a dispensation in proper
time. — Const. Md.

"Who May Join in Masonic Processions.

None but master masons can join in a masonic burial pro-
cession. Non-affiliated masons cannot join in any masonic
procession, except it be on one of the festival days of the
fraternity. Entered apprentices and fellow crafts may join
in processions on festival occasions, laying corner stones, &c,
but not on funeral occasions.*

It is highly unmasonic to admit entered apprentices or fel-
low crafts to join in a funeral procession. — Res. Ind., 1849.

None but master masons can be allowed to walk in funeral
processions as masons. — C. W. Moore, 1845.

Lodges are recommended not to allow entered apprentices
and fellow crafts to move in funeral processions. — Res. Mo^
1843.

In the processions for dedications, and laying corner stones,
entered apprentices and fellow crafts may be present and
take the place assigned them ; but as none but master masons
can be buried with masonic honors, so none but master
masons can be permitted to join the procession. — Haswell,
C. F. C. Vt, 1849.

Non-affiliated masons cannot join in masonic processions. —
Mackey, U. M. L., xviii., 295.

* See preceding section, and also "masonic burials," and "non-affiliated
jaasons."

422 THE MASTER — WHO MAY JOIN IN MASONIC PROCESSIONS.

Entered apprentices and fellow crafts cannot join in masonic
funeral process! ons. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 187.

We do not know that the right to join in the public pro-
cession has ever been denied to entered apprentices. Masonic
law is null which prohibits them from so doing. The case is
different with regard to masonic burial and funeral proces-
sions. These last form an exception to the general rule. — ■
Lawrence, C. F. C. Geo., 1856.

In processions which are formed in a master mason's lodge,
such as funerals, &c., of course none but master masons can
have a place assigned them. Those processions in which
masons of all degrees can join, such as celebrations, &c, are
formed in an entered apprentice's lodge ; and in accordance
with the established order of masonic processions, the place
for entered apprentices is in front. All processions must be
formed in the lodge, proceed out from it, and return back
into it in the same order. — Brown, C. F. C. of Fla., 1858.

Masonic processions are usually held on four occasions :
1st, to bury the dead ; 2d, to lay the corner stones of masonic
halls and public buildings ; 3d, to dedicate masonic halls ;
4th, masonic festivals. Custom has sanctioned these occa-
sions. Processions are a peculiar feature of the order, and
should not be held, except on occasions devoted to the inter-
est, or sanctioned by the ancient usages of Masonry. How
can we, with propriety, make ourselves common property to
swell a pageant for a day, and in the end advance no interest
which is within the field of our labor ? — Wood, G. M. Ala.,
1855.

No masonic funeral,, or other public procession shall, on
any pretense, be allowed, without the license of the Grand
Master, or provincial Grand Master. — Const. Eng.

No masonic procession shall take place unless by dispen-
sation from the Grand Lodge, Grand Master, or Deputy
Grand Master — Const. Ireland.

None but chartered lodges can hold a procession. — Hyam,
G. M. Cat., 1853

THE MASTER — LODGE RECORDS. 423

No dispensation is needed from me, (Grand Master) to
chartered 1 )dges to have a public procession.* To a lodge
working under dispensation it is necessary. — Hubbard, Ohio,
1851.

A lodge should never be formed as such, and be seen in
public, except in attending to business exclusively theirs ;
such as burying a deceased brother, celebrating a masonic
anniversary, laying the corner stone of public edifices, &c. —
Ibid, 1853.

Lodge Kecords.
It is the duty of the Secretary to record the truth, and the
lodge cannot alter or expunge, except to make the record
conform to the truth. After the record of a meeting has
been once approved, it cannot be expunged, and can only be
amended by explanatory or amendatory notes. A meeting
cannot, consistently, alter or amend the proceedings of a
former one. Each meeting is the only proper judge of its
own records, and no other meeting can properly alter or
amend them. Even under the liberal rule, that a meeting
may amend the proceedings of a former one, it is distinctly
declared, that such amending cannot be done at a special
meeting.f

The minutes of every meeting should be read at the close
of such meeting, and if any errors be noted, they should be
corrected, and then the minutes be declared correct. At the
subsequent meeting, the record is read, not for correction,
but for the information of those present, in relation to the
business of the preceding and the present meeting.

I decided that any Master of a lodge was responsible for
the correctness of his book of lodge records, while he re-
mained in office, and that his successor had no power to di-
rect an alteration in a matter which his predecessor vouched
for as correct, and for which he alone was responsible. I es-

* This is to be understood as the local law in Ohio, as interpreted by tha
Grand Master.
f See Special Meetings.

424 THE MASTER — LODGE RECORDS.

teem it of strong importance that all lodge records be made
rightly, according to truth, and that the presiding Master see
that they are so, and be held responsible for their correctness.
—Tucker, G. M. Vt., 1852.

Your committee consider the following statement of usages
and principles to be deducible from ancient masonic rules,
viz : the Secretary is the servant of the lodge ; and his duty
is well defined in the charge given him by the Master, on his
being inducted into office. That part of his duty, which con-
sists in making a record of the meeting and business of the
lodge, is performed by the side of the Master, and under his
eye, and the first draught should be inspected by the Master be-
fore being entered and recorded ; for it is the duty of the Mas-
ter to see that the proceedings of the lodge be faithfully and
properly recorded. Of course the Master has a right to express
his opinion with regard to the accuracy of statement, or mode
of expression. Moreover, there may be transactions in a
lodge which are not worth recording, or which it would not
be proper to make matters of history to be perpetuated in the
records, and about the inexpediency of entering which the
opinion of the Master is to be given. If, however, a misun-
derstanding should arise between the Master and the Secre-
tary as to the article for record, it may be stated in open
lodge, for explanation or decision. If the Master object to
an article as improper for record, or to the terms in which
one is expressed that is a fit matter of record, and the Secre-
tary, making no reference to the opinion of the lodge, inserts
and certifies it, he errs ; but the record cannot be canceled ;
the lodge book is not to be defaced, nor may the leaf be cut out.
All the remedy is, an entry of emendation, or correction, by
the Master, or under his direction, or by a vote of the lodge.
This specification of ancient principles and inferences from

thern, is respectfully submitted by Francis J. Oliver,

Thaddeus Mason Harris, Samuel L. Knapp. [Report Adopted.]
—Mass., 1822.

The minutes of a meeting cannot, after correction, be al-
tered or expunged by any subsequent lodge. — Reg. Miss.

THE MASTER — LODGE RECORDS. 425

The signature of the Master is not necessary to give valid-
ity to the proceedings of the lodge. The approval of the
lodge, and the signature of the Secretary, make the records
complete. — C. W. Moore, 1846.

The object of reading the minutes is to correct any errors
the Secretary may have made, to supply omissions, and to see
that the minutes speak the truth. The question on reading
them is, not whether the lodge approves of all that was done
at the preceding meeting, but to see that the minutes are a
fair and correct account of what was done. — Rice, D. G. 31.
Ga., 1855.

A lodge cannot alter the minutes that were made up and
approved at a previous meeting ; they may correct mistakes
or omissions, but they cannot strike out or add to, so as to
make them represent anything but what was done by the
lodge. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1852. Com. Juris, do. Gr. Lodge do.

After the minutes are regularly approved and signed, they
cannot be altered. Whatever is regularly spread upon the
minutes, may be copied by the Secretary, and furnished to
any member of the lodge asking it. — Swigert, G. 31. Ky.,
1858.

The names of all the officers, members, and visitors, should
be given at length at called or stated meetings. — Iowa, 1851.

A lodge possesses no right or power to obliterate her
records.— Hall, G. 31. Texas, 1858.

"We know of nothing to authorize the expunging a matter
from the minutes of a lodge. — Ed. Texas Freemason, 1858.

The lodge has no rigid to change its minutes after once
regularly approving them. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 65.

A Sef retary is bound, by the tenure of his office, to obey
the will of the Master, and the directions of the lodge, in re-
cording all things Droper to be written. — Smith, G. 31. Ark.,
1856.

426 THE MASTER — GRAND LODGE CERTIFICATES.

Grand Lodge Certificates.

As yet there is no well-defined and well-settled rule in re-
gard to the use of certificates. In some jurisdictions they
are required of every visitor not known to the lodge to be a
worthy brother ; in others, they are only required of those
hailing from foreign jurisdictions ; and in others, they are sel-
dom required, or even asked for. Grand Lodges, and other
masonic authorities, have discussed the question, in extenso,
but have come to such contradictory conclusions, that we
cannot say there is any general rule in relation to their use.

The fact of their undoubted antiquity, and extensive use,
seems to settle their real value, in certain cases; while the
strong arguments brought against them, and the opposition
to them, joined to the fact, that the usage varies so much in
the several jurisdictions, would seem to show that they should
not be invariably required from visitors.

No person, hereafter, who shall be accepted a freemason,
shall be admitted into any lodge or assembly, until he has
brought a certificate of the time and place of his acceptation
from the lodge that accepted him, unto the Master of that
limit or division where such lodge is kept. — Reg. 1663.

Ordered, That no mason be admitted to any subordinate
lodge, under the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, or receive
the charities of any lodge, unless he shall, on such applica-
tion, exhibit a Grand Lodge certificate, duly attested by the
proper authorities, except he is known to the lodge to be a worthy
brother. — N. Y., 1843. The proper stand. — Mackey, Lex-
icon, 78.

No transient person shall be examined at the door of any
lodge under this jurisdiction, on his presenting himself as a
visitor, unless he first furnish the examining committee with
a Grand Lodge certificate. — S. C, 1827.

The above resolution " is to be construed so as not to ex-
tend to the members of any lodge under this jurisdiction,
provided they furnish the examining committee with a lodge
certificate."— lb., 1827.

THE MASTER GRAND LODGE CERTIFICATES. 427

The presentation of a certificate is required by this Grand
Lodge, simply as a testimonial of good masonic standing, pre-
paratory to an examination ; and, therefore, where the party
can furnish other sufficient evidence of his masonic standing,
and assign a satisfactory reason for his being without a certifi-
cate, the lodge which he proposes to visit may proceed to his
examination. — Ibid., 1848.

Xo brother hailing from a jurisdiction requiring Grand
Lodge certificates, shall be admitted to any subordinate lodge,
or receive the charities of the same, unless he shall, on such
application, exhibit a Grand Lodge certificate, duly attested
by the proper authorities, except he is known to the lodge to
be a worthy brother. — Con4. Iowa.

This Grand Lodge does not deem it expedient to require
lodges to demand Grand Lodge certificates as a necessary
and indispensable prerequisite to the granting of charity to
distressed brethren, if such lodges are otherwise satisfied
that such applicant is worthy. — Res. Tenn.

In 1846, the Grand Lodge of New Hampshire indefinitely
postponed a resolution requiring of strangers a Grand Lodge
certificate as a prerequisite for admission to any lodge.

This Grand Lodge requires that all traveling masons, who
may desire aid from the fraternity of the state, shall present
a certificate of good standing, &c. — Res. Ark., 1853.

This Grand Lodge does not deem it expedient to adopt the
system of granting Grand Lodge certificates of membership
to members of subordinate lodges. — Res. Me., 1847.

As a general principle, I cannot for a moment recognize a
paper or parchment voucher as entitling a man to, or a want
of it debarring him from, masonic privileges ; yet I hold it
a duty of every brother to furnish all the evidence in his
power to satisfy the lodge he seeks to visit, that he is no im-
postor.— G. M. of Me., 1848.

Our views were given as adverse to the issue of Grand
Lodge certificates, at our last annual communication, and we
still adher > to that decision.— Haswell, C F. C. Vt., 1849

428 THE MASTER — GRAND LODGE CERTDTICATES.

Let a certificate be demanded of all visitors who cannot be
vouched for either as being regular masons, or, if not known
as such, as being citizens of another jurisdiction. In the lat-
ter case, the usual examination might suffice. In view of the
large number of improper persons from all jurisdictions, ex-
pelled masons, and others, who possess the qualifications to
pass through the usual examination successfully, it may se-
riously be considered whether the interests of our institution
do not render necessary a regulation like that you have
adopted in reference to visitors from New York* which shall
be applicable to all visitors. Some brethren erroneously hold
to the opinion that such a requirement would be a violation
of the masonic privileges. — Heard, G. M. Mass., 1857.

The convention has recommended the plan of issuing
Grand Lodge certificates to every master mason ; but if this
plan is to be not only a test of the moral character and stand-
ing of a brother, but also a necessary passport to the char-
ities of the institution, it appears to your committee, that it
would be entirely subversive of the principal landmarks of
the institution, and put to silence that universal language by
which the needy and distressed brother is known in every
quarter of the habitable globe, without guaranteeing even a
probability of success to the plan proposed, as the unworthy
would be certain to avail themselves, by some means, of this
new test of their moral and masonic worth. — Com. II. L, 1844.
[Adopted.]

The Grand lodge of the Netherlands, in 1855, complained
that a brother, with a proper certificate, was only admitted
to a fellow craft's lodge, in New York, because he could not
work his way into a master's lodge; and claimed that a
brother, with a regular certificate, should always be admit-
ted, provided there was no doubt of his identity, and passed
a resolution requiring her subordinates to act accordingly.

Grand Lodges are particularly urged to require Grand

* l3y which Grand Lodge certificates are required from all visitors hailing
from that state.

THE MASTER — GRAND LODGE CERTIFICATES. 429

Lodge certificates from strangers, as an additional safeguard
against tie abuse of masonic privileges, by the unworthy, —
Baltimore Convention, 1843.

"We deny the right of any body of masons to require the
production of Grand Lodge certificates, as an indispensable
prerequisite to the recognition of brethren hailing from this
jurisdiction.— C. F. C, N. K, 1848.

We recommend that Grand Lodges advise, if they do not
deem it necessary to require, their lodges to demand certifi-
cates of the good standing of brethren who are strangers. —
Washington Convention, 1842.

A modern paper system of ancient Freemasonry. — &mith,
C. F. C. Mich., 1848.

This Grand Lodge has adopted the Grand Lodge certifi-
cates.— Par yin, C. F. C. Iowa, 1846.

The Grand Lodge of Iowa does not recognize the certificate
system.— lb., 1848.

The Grand Lodge of Georgia approves of the certificate
system.

The following named Grand Lodges disapprove of the cer-
tificate system : Alabama, Michigan, and Connecticut.

Much good might result from a universal requirement of
these certificates ; but much, if not all, is lost by a partial ac-
quiescence on the part of the several Grand Lodges. — Par-
vin, C. F. C. Iowa, 1847.

A Grand Lodge certificate can only be taken as prima facia
evidence of one fact, and that doubtful ; that is, if the person
who holds it be the person named in it, it is prima facia evi-
dence of the fact that the bearer was in regular standing as a

Fote. Several of the Grand Lodges, for obvious reasons, have adopted

special resolutions, &c, requiring of all visitors hailing from New York, a
Grand Lodge certificate. As the insertion of such, in this work, would have oc-
cupied much room, this note is substituted, ?s equally valuable for our purposes,
—G. W. C.

430 THE MASTER — GRAND LODGE CERTIFICATES.

mason, on the date of its date, and that is all. — Humphries,
G. M. Iowa, 1848.

We believe the scheme, to say the best of it, of doubtful
•utility. — Com. Iowa, 1848.

Another regulation is, that a strange brother shall furnish
the lodge he intends to visit with a certificate of his good
standing in the lodge from which he last hailed. — Mackey,
P. M. L., 258.

There is no necessity in Masonry for certificates, diplomas,
and cards. — Hyneman, Ed. Mir. and Key., 1859.

The certificate is, by no means, intended to act as a voucher
for the bearer, nor can it be allowed to supersede the neces-
sity of a strict examination. — Mackey, Lexicon, 78.

Neither a diploma or demit is evidence that its holder is a
worthy mason. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 14. Which is an un-
answerable argument against their use. — G. W. C.

I view Grand Lodge certificates, in the sense some of our
modern jurists recommend them, as a most dangerous innova-
tion, and calculated to break down the barriers established
by our fathers against the admission of the ignorant and de-
signing.— Morris, Am. F. M;, iv., 148.

The Grand Lodge of Ohio has, without a dissenting voice,
repudiated the whole system of Grand Lodge certificates. —
Ed. Mas. Rev., 1847.

A diploma is a mere certificate, officiaEy issued by the
lodge, that A. B. has regularly received the several degrees,
and is, at the date of the certificate, a worthy member of the
lodge. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev., xiv., 116.

A certificate is a diploma issued by a Grand Lodge, or by
a subordinate lodge under its authority, testifying that the
holder thereof is a true and trusty brother, and recommend-
ing him to the hospitality of the fraternity abroad. — Mackey,
Lexicon, 78.

THE MASTER — PAST MaSTERS — THE DEGREE OF. 431

Past Masters.
Within the past few years, the powers, rights and privi-
leges of Past Masters have been thoroughly discussed, and
the general opinion now held is, that Past Masters, as such,
possess no rights and privileges not possessed by any master
mason, except those specifically granted them by their par-
ticular Grand Lodge, or allowed by courtesy, unless it be the
right to confer the degree of Past Master upon the Master
elect of a lodge.

The Degree of Past Master.
We have the best of reasons for believing, that the degree
of Past Master was not known until the very last part of the
last century, and is almost exclusively of American origin.

The right of a Grand Lodge to confer the degree of Past
Master, has never been contended' for, or exercised by the
Grand Lodge of Vermont, it being considered as belonging
to the Royal Arch Chapter ; instances have occurred where
this degree has been conferred on a Master elect, by three
or more Past Masters, in presence of Past Masters only ; but
it is now considered as a proper appendage to the chapter
degrees.— Haswell, C. F. C. Vt, 1849.

In the opinion of this Grand Lodge, the jurisdiction of the
Past Master's degree ought, in the fitness of things, to be
vested in the several Grand Lodges, and not in chapters of
Royal Arch masons. — Res. Conn., 1852.

We look upon this degree as nothing more than the in-
stallation service of a Master, embellished for the use of
chapters. That, as an installation service, it is necessary to
a Master before acting in that office. That, as an installation
service, it is under the control of any one or more of those
who have received it, and may be conferred by any one or
more of them, and they may ask the aid of, and allow chapter
Past Masters to be present. That as a degree and an in-
stallation service, it differs somewhat in ceremonies. That
as a degree, it is solely under the jurisdiction of chapters ;

432 THE MASTER — THE DEGREE OF PAST MASTER.

but as an installation service, it is solely under the legislative
jurisdiction of the Grand Lodges, and the conferring juris-
diction of those who have received it. We do not think a
chapter Past Master can legally confer it on a Master elect,
unless he who confers it lias served as an elected Master.
The Grand Master, when installing a Master elect, or any one
deputed by him to perform that ceremony, being a Past
Master by election in a lodge, can confer it. — Hatch, C. F. C.
of N. Y, 1851.

The Grand Master requested all below the degree of Past
Master to retire. After which, a convocation of Past Masters
were assembled, who proceeded to open a lodge of Past
Masters, and the following brethren were severally intro-
duced, and legally qualified to preside over their respective
lodges, by having the Past Master's degree conferred upon
them.— Ext. Pro. Mo., 1852.

Our Grand Lodge has always refused to permit Past Masters
made in a chapter to be present at the induction of the
Master elect of a symbolic lodge into the oriental chair.* —
Mackey, S. C, 1852.

With the exception, perhaps, of Louisiana and South Caro-
lina, a mason who has received the degree of Past Master in
a chapter, is regarded in all the states in the Union as eligi-
ble to the Master's chair as one who had received it from a
convocation of regular Past Masters.f — King, C. F. C, N. Y.,
1854.

In the Blue Lodge, no recognition can be taken of the
chapter degrees. The only Past Masters known or recognized
in the Blue Lodge, are such as have been duly installed, and
have actually passed the chair. — Brown, Com. Fla., 1854.

* The above is the practice in England, where one class is denominated actual
Past Masters, and the other virtual Past Masters. — G. W. C.

f The compiler was thus elected to the chair in a lodge, and the installing
officer (Dttnlap, Past Grand Master, and Past G. and Gen. Grand H. P.) admitted
and recognized the chapter degree, by omitting all ceremony, &c, except thai
usual on a re-installa ion of a Master. — G. W. C.

THE MASTER — THE DEGREE OF PAST MASTER. 433

A Master must receive the honorary degree of Past Master
before installation. — Lewis, G. M., N. Y., 1858.

In the Grand Lodge of South Carolina, 1856, a petition
being presented, praying that the Past Master's degree might
be conferred on one who had acted as Master of a lodge,
while under dispensation, it was Resolved, That the prayer
of said petition be declined, as being contrary to the ancient
regulations of the order.

It is the sense of this Grand Lodge, that no brother, who
has not taken the Past Master's degree, is competent to pre-
side as Master of a chartered lodge under this jurisdiction. —
Res. RL, 1851.

In Mississippi one Past Master only is considered necessary
in qualifying a Master elect. — Mellen, C. F. C. Miss., 1856.

A Past Master, who is such merely by degree, has no au-
thority in a lodge more than any other master mason ; neither
has a Past Master, by office, except that which is conferred
on him by the Master, or either of the Wardens, who are
there present. — Miss., 1858.

Receiving the Past Master's degree in a chapter, confers
no privileges that can be made available in a Blue Lodge.
A brother having once received the degree in a chapter, it
would supersede the necessity of his receiving it again as a
qualification for office. He would be competent to preside
in a Blue Lodge, if elected. — C. W. Moore, 1846.

A great error was committed when the power of making
nominal Past Masters was conceded to, or assumed by, the
chapters. There was no necessity for it. — C. W. Moore,
1848.

A chapter Past Master is a regular Past Master, though of
another jurisdiction, and has the secrets of the chair as com-
pletely as any other Past Master. No distinction has ever
been made in this jurisdiction between a Chapter and Blue
Past Master, except the former is not entitled to preside in a
Blue Lodge, and is not a member of the Grand Lodge. —
Mellen, Miss., 1855.
19

434 THE MASTER — THE DEGREE OP 7 AST MASTER.

We recognize no degree of present or Past Master, con
ferred by any authority not holden under a legitimate Grand
Lodge. — Res. Cal., 1855.

The Past Master's degree is not necessary to qualify a
Master to preside. — Mich., 1855.

The order or degree of Past Master, as an order or degree
separate from the installation ceremony of a Master elect, is
not necessary for a Master to preside. — Ark., 1855.

This Grand Lodge does not recognize the degree of Past
Master. It can only concede the title and privileges, and
confide the duties of Past Master to such master masons as
have been regularly elected and installed into the office of
Master of a lodge of symbolic Freemasonry. — La., 1856.

Lodges of Master Masons, and Grand Lodges, have no
such degree as Past Master. They have no right to confer
such degree. The Master is vested, by a legal election and
installation, with all necessary authority to preside in his own
lodge, no matter who is present. — R. I., 1855.

The Grand Lodge of Virginia requires Wardens, as well
as Masters, to receive the degree of Past Master.* — G. W. C.

This General Grand Chapter docs not claim jurisdiction
over the degree of Past Master, when about to be conferred
upon the Master elect of a symbolic lodge. — Res. G. G. C,
1850.

The degree of Past Master obtained in a chapter, does not
qualify a person to preside as Master of a symbolic lodge.
Such chapter degree cannot, in any way, be recognized in
Blue Masonry. — Pike, Ark.

In the absence of the Master, he Senior Warden, and in
his absence the Junior Warden presides, without having re-
ceived this degree or order. — Ibid.

The Past Master's degree is not acknowledged in England.

* We believe no other Grand Lodge in the world has a similar regulation.
— G. W. C.

THE MISTER — THE DEGREE OF PAS1 MASTER. 435

They have simply the ceremony of installing a Master into
the chair of his lodge.

In Ireland and Scotland, the degree is given as a pass to
the Royal Arch. They make this distinction, however, call-
ing the one an actual, and the other a virtual Past Master.
But, as a degree, it carries no authority with it whatever.

A Past Master thus made cannot attend a meeting of in-
stalled Masters, or be present when a Master is installed into
the chair of his lodge. In England it is not recognized as
necessary, before receiving the Royal Arch. — G. W. C.

Three, or more Past Masters may confer the degree upon
a Master elect of a lodge, but they cannot confer it in any
other case, or for any other purpose whatever. — Mm., 1856.

This Grand Lodge will require a brother to have the Past
Master's degree, before he can be installed as Master of a
lodge under this jurisdiction. — Res. Iowa, 1845.

It is highly improper and unmasonic to confer the Past
Master's degree upon any master mason who has not been
elected to preside over a regularly constituted lodge. — Res.
Maine, 1847. We entirely concur in this resolution — Parvin,
C. F. C. Iowa, 1848.

There is no necessity for the Master of a lodge under dis-
pensation to have the degree of Past Master. He is not,
moreover, qualified to take it. — Humphreys, G. M. Iowa, 1849.

It is not necessary for a master mason to preside over a
lodge in the capacity of Warden, nor for the Master of a
lodge under dispensation. — Res. Texas, 1852.

The new Master is then conducted to an adjacent room,
where he is regularly installed, and bound to his trust in
ancient form, in the presence of at least three installed Masters.*
•—Preston.

I believe that the true rule is, to deny the chapter, or vir*

* This part of the ceremony can only he orally communicated, nor can any
but installed Masters bo present. — Oijver.

436 THE MASTER — CONFERRING DEGREES, AC.

tual Past Masters, the right to install, or to be present at the
installation of the Master of a symbolic lodge. — Mackey, P.
M. L., 278.

The Master of a lodge, whether a chartered lodge, or one
under dispensation, must be a Past Master, to be able to
govern it correctly. He might perform all the work of his
office, confer degrees, give lectures, open and close his
lodges, &c, as well without the Past Master's degree as with
it, but he could not govern his lodge. — Morris, Am. F. M.y
v., 52.

A Past Master made in a Royal Arch Chapter need not be in-
ducted into the oriental chair, in the event of his being elected
Master of a symbolic lodge. — Res. G. G. Chap., 1853. Res.
Grand Chap. Ky., 1854. This has long been settled by gene-
ral consent. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 45.

That one who has received the degree of Past Master in a
chapter, cannot be one of three to confer the " honorary
degree of Past Master," is to us a new doctrine. The degree
in both cases is precisely the same. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev.,
viii., 282.

Conferring Degrees upon Clergymen, without Fee.
It has been a common practice, to admit ministers of the
gospel into the order, and to membership, without fee. Sev-
eral Grand Lodges have favored the practice, by remitting all
Grand Lodge fees and dues for the initiation and membership
of clergymen.

It may well be doubted, however, whether such practice,
or custom, is masonically just. Masonry professes to regard
no man for his wealth, or outward appearance ; and a man's
profession, or calling, providing it be an honest one, should
not be allowed to augment, or dispense with, any of the uni-
versal prerequisites for admission. All should come in on
the level. One brother should not be required or allowed to
pay an increased tax for the support of our organization, for
the purpose of relieving another, and one equally, or perhaps
better, able to pay, from any tax of the kind,

THE BLASTER — CONFERRING DEGREES, AC. 431

So far as our information extends, it would appear that the
practice mentioned is gradually becoming obsolete.

A lodge has not the right to receive members free of dues,
except they be in indigent circumstances — if the by-laws
prescribe payment of dues. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

No distinction shall be made in amount of fees, on account
of profession or occupation of applicant — Res. Texas, 1851.

The question whether a lodge can confer the degrees on a
minister of the gospel, gratis, or remit the amount of fees
therefor, or donate to him the amount thereof, seems to be
still unsettled in the minds of some. This Grand Lodge has
decided, that it would be a violation of the spirit of our Con-
stitution to confer the degrees gratuitously, or remit the
amount ; and I have maintained on this, as on other questions,
that manifest and intentional evasions of the Constitution are
to be regarded as violations of it. Entertaining, as I do, the
most profound respect for the sacred office, and always will-
ing to manifest it, on proper occasions, I do, nevertheless,
most positively object to the recognition of any such distinc-
tion in our lodges. — G. M. La., 1855.

This Grand Lodge will not require any fee for the initiation
of any minister of God. — Ga., 1842.

It is improper to confer the chapter degrees on clergymen
without the usual fees. — Res. Grand Chapter Texas, 1855.

When the by-laws of a subordinate lodge provide that the
degrees may be conferred on ministers of the gospel, free of
charge, no initiation fees as dues shall be charged to such
lodge by the Grand Lodge. — Res. Ohio, 1844.

It is not obligatory upon a lodge to entertain the applica-
tion of a clergyman free of charge. It requires an unanimous
vote to elect such, as much as in any other case. A major-
ity vote can make a donation of money belonging to the
lodge. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

Any lodge may confer the degrees, without fees, upon any
acknowledged minister of the gospel. — Reg. 111.

438 THE MASTER — MASONIC WIDOW AND ORPHAN.

Lodges shall pay for each of their members — Secretaries
and clergymen excepted — fifty cents. (Indef. post.) — Mich.
1858.

No lodge shall make a mason, except a minister of the gos-
pel, or for the purpose of being a Tiler, for a less sum than
twenty dollars. — Const. Del.

Provided, ministers of the gospel may be admitted gratu-
itously.— Reg. Iowa, 1852.

Lodges are authorized to remit the fees for conferring the
degrees on ministers of the gospel, when they are so disposed,
Tenn., 1853.

The Grand Lodge have nc right to impose the duty of con-
ferring the degrees of Masonry upon any person, without
being paid therefor the regular fees which may have been es-
tablished by any subordinate lodge. — Rep. Com. Gr. Lodge
N. K, 1826. (Subj. indef. post.)

Clergymen approbated by competent authority to preach
the gospel, may be initiated, crafted, and raised, without any
fee whatever. — Const. Me., 1820.

No lodge shall be charged any fees or dues for clergymen,
for whom, no member or initiation fee shall be charged. —
Const. Md. Any lodge may confer the degrees, without fee,
upon any minister of the gospel. — lb.

Voted, That the fees payable to the Grand Lodge, on the
initiation of ordained and permanently settled clergymen, be
in future remitted. — Mass., 1812.

A resolution declaring it not contrary to the spirit and
landmarks of Masonry to confer the degrees gratuitously on
regular ministers of the gospel, was rejected in the Grand
Lodge of North Carolina, 1851.

Masonic "Widow and Orphan
The widow and the orphan of a brother master mason have
strong and peculiar claims upon the masonic fraternity. Sev-
eral of the Grand Lodges have provided a means, though an
imperfect one, by which such widow and orphan may be able

THE MASTER — MASONIC WIDOW AND ORPHAN. 439

to prove their claim as such. Justice would seem to demand,
that all the Grand Lodges should do so.

The widow or orphan of an expelled, or suspended mason,
has no masonic claim as such. A simple suspension of mem-
bership, however, does not destroy such claim.

If the widow of a mason marry a second time, she loses her
masonic claim. If she be again left a widow, we are of opinion,
her claim is not renewed or recovered, by virtue of her
second widowhood.

But with respect to the children of a deceased brother
mason, the rule is otherwise. Once an orphan, always an
orphan, is the rule. Any future change in the social rela-
tions of the mother, does not affect their masonic claims as
the orphans of a mason.

Imperative duty of Master, upon the death of a member in
good standing, to report the same to the Grand Secretary,
wTho shall fill out a diploma, free of expense, for the benefit
of the widow or orphans. — Res. Va., 1851.

Upon the death of any master mason, in good standing,
and a member of any lodge under this jurisdiction, such lodge
shall furnish to the widow and orphans of the deceased a cer-
tificate of his membership, standing, and death, under seal,
without any charge therefor. — Reg. Ark.

Lodges are required to furnish the widow or the orphans
of each deceased brother master mason who was in good
standing, with a certificate of such brother's standing, at his
death.— Res. III., 1847. Res. Tenn., 1853. Texas, 1849.

A mason's widow being again married, loses her masonic
claims, at least while her second husband lives. If left again
a widow, her former privileges of a mason's relict are re-
stored to her. — Morris, Am. F. M., v., 85.

When a mason's widow marries again, she ceases to be
a mason's widow, and her claim as such terminates. — C. W.
Moore.

The orphans of a mason remain orphans, though the mother

440 THE MASTER ITINERANT MASONIC LECTURERS.

marries again, and, as such, have claims upon the fraternity,
C. W. Moore.

There is no usage or regulation by which, like our state
poor laws, the destitute are to be traced back to a former
settlement or residence. Wherever they are found, there
the relief should be provided by the fraternity. — Hubbard,
G. M. Ohio, 1851.

The widow of a suspended mason has no claims to masonic
aid. — C. Moore, Mas. Rev., xiii., 250.

We think a wife or widow of a mason, although she may
have married a second husband, or become widowed a
second time, does not lose her claim upon masons while
she lives, and ought to be assisted whenever she may need it,
if she is a worthy and reputable woman. This is the opinion
held by Virginia, and, we believe, several other Grand
Lodges.— Hatch, C. F. C, N. Y., 1851. We much question
such a claim. — Morris, Am. F. 31., ii., 95.

Itinerant Masonic Lecturers.

One of the most prolific sources of confusion and discrep-
ancies in the masonic work and lectures, may be found in the
practice of encouraging and employing itinerant masonic lec-
turers. Each Grand Lodge is its own judge of what is the
correct ritual, and its subordinate lodges are bound to con-
form to that which it prescribes. Many of the Grand Lodges
employ one or more skillful craftsman to instruct their lodges
in the work and lectures of Masonry. The instructions of
such regularly appointed lecturers, must be received and
obeyed by the subordinate lodges, until changed by the Grand
Lodge itself.

Subordinate lodges have no right to employ any lecturer,
as such, who has not been approved by their Grand Lodge.
Such prohibition does not apply to the employment of proper
persons to deliver private addresses, or lectures, upon ma-
sonic subjects generally. It is to be interpreted as referring
only to the work, and accompanying illustrations, or lectures-

THE MASTER ITINERANT MASONIC LECTURERS. 441

The Grand Lodge deems it improper and unmasonic for the
subordinate lodges to permit any itinerant masonic lecturer
to visit their lodges for the purpose of lecturing. — Reg. Miss.

No lodge shall receive lectures from any person, as the au-
thorized work, unless under the sanction of the Grand Lodge
or Grand Master. — Res. CaL, 1852.

The lodges under this jurisdiction are instructed to dis-
countenance all itinerant lecturers on Freemasonry, and that
none be allowed to lecture but such as are authorized by the
Grand Lodge.— 5. C, 1853.

No lodge shall encourage, promote, or permit, the delivery
of any masonic lectures, which have not been sanctioned and
authorized by the Grand Lodge. Nor shall any mason be
permitted to deliver such lectures under this jurisdiction. —
Coasts. Mass., Maine, R. I., and Wis.

Every lodge shall adopt and practice the standard of work
and lectures imparted by the Grand Lecturer, or Assistant
Grand Lecturers, and no other. * * * Any freemason,
not duly authorized, who shall impart such work and lectures,
shall be subject to expulsion. — Const. N. Y.

All lodges under this jurisdiction are prohibited from em-
ploying any itinerant lecturer, to instruct them in the ritual,
and ceremonies of the order, without the special permission
of the Grand Lodge, or Grand Master, in writing. — Const. La

No lodge shall permit the delivery of lectures on the work
and degrees of Masonry, by any one who is not a member of
this Grand Lodge, or some lodge under its jurisdiction ; or by
some one duly authorized by the Grand Lodge. Nor shall
any lodge permit the delivery of any lectures, except such as
have been sanctioned by the Grand Lodge. — Consts. Mo. and
Kansas.

Subordinate lodges in this jurisdiction are prohibited from
employing, or in any way giving aid and encouragement to
itinerant masonic lecturers, who lecture for pay. — Res. Texas,
1857.

19*

442 THE MASTER — PALIAMENTARY USAGES.

Parliamentary Usages.
Much discussion has arisen, at various times in relation to
the propriety, or necessity, of introducing parliamentary
usages into the lodge-room. The following, extracts seem to
us to be eminently just and proper, and to cover the whole
ground of the discussion.

The masonic rule should be, that where well-settled par-
liamentary principles can be properly applied to the action
of masonic bodies, they should always govern ; but they
should never be introduced where they, in any way, interfere
with the established customs or landmarks of Masonry, or
with the high prerogatives of the Master. — B. B. French, Am.
Q. R. Fm., 1858.

We are not aware of any good reason why, in the legisla-
tive business of a lodge, the ordinary rules which prevail in
other deliberative bodies would not be convenient and useful.
But in all matters appertaining to the technicalities of the
masonic ritual, the working of the lodge, and everything
which in itself is purely and absolutely connected with the
conferring of degrees, the decisions of the presiding officer
are, ex necessitate, for the time being, final. — Tucker, Vt., 1851.

All questions of order not purely masonic, not provided for
in the by-laws of the Grand Lodge, or the subordinate lodge,
and not controlled by the established usage of the particular
lodge, should be decided in accordance with parliamentary
usages. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii.. 178.

Committee of the Whole. — Among those parliamentary
usages which seem to be generally considered as improper
and out of place, in a masonic lodge, is that of resolving the
body into a " Committee of the Whole." There is no occasion
for such a proceeding in a masonic body.

A lodge has no right to go into a " committee of the whole."
Such a committee, not being recognized by our ancient Con-
stitutions, or general regulations, is unmasonic in form.—*
Com. Me., 1852.

THE MASTER — PARLIAMENTARY USAGES. 443

The report having been read, on motion, it was voted that
the same be taken up in committee of the whole, and that the
Deputy Grand Master be chairman of said committee. * *
The committee then rose, reported progress by its chairman,
and leave was granted for them to sit again. — Proc. FJ.,1849.

The Grand Lodge, on motion, resolved itself into a conven-
tion, for the purpose of electing officers for the ensuing year.
Pro. Mass., 1817.

"We see that the Grand Lodge of Indiana, like that of Vir-
ginia, occasionally resolves itself into a committee of the
whole. This anomalous feature in masonic legislation en-
tirely overturns the long-established and universally recog-
nized principle of masonic government. — King, C. F. C. of
N. Y., 1853.

The Previous Question. — This is a very useful and neces-
sary rule in ordinary legislative bodies, but is entirely unappro-
priate in a masonic lodge. When the Master wishes to stop
a debate, he has full power to do so, and no one or more of
the members can continue or prevent such debate if the
Master decide otherwise.

The previous question being unknown to ancient Masonry,
should find no resting-place in a masonic lodge. We believe
the practice to be an innovation. — Haswell, C. F. C. Fi.,1851.

We consider it very necessary, in so large bodies as the
Grand Lodge of New York.— Hatch, C. F. C, N. Y, 1852.

The calling for the previous question to terminate debate,
is unknown to Masonry. The Master has the power, at his
discretion, to terminate debate. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

We decidedly condemn the introduction into our masonic
language, of such expressions as " adjourn," " previous ques-
tion," " yeas and nays," &c; they are foreign to our work. —
Parvin, C. jP. C. Iowa, 1847.

Calling for the previous question in lodges we believe to
be improper. — 0 Moore, Mas. Rev., vii., 344.

444 THE MASTER — MISCELLANEOUS.

Miscellaneous.

MASONIC SYMBOLS AS ADVERTISEMENTS.

The employment of masonic symbols, or emblems, as signs
to attract attention to one's business, unless such business be
exclusively or largely masonic, is a perversion of their use,
and worthy of severe condemnation. We have no doubt
that a brother so offending is amenable to masonic discipline.
(But the wearing of a masonic pin, or ring, or other jewelry,
within proper bounds, is not only no offense, but perfectly
consistent with the spirit of Freemasonry, and is a matter
upon which Grand Lodge legislation seems to us to be out
of place. An abuse of the privilege is undoubtedly and
appropriately within the jurisdiction of the particular lodge
to which the offender belongs, or in which he resides.)

In the opinion of this Grand Lodge, the use of masonic
emblems upon sign-boards, is unmasonic, and in open viola-
tion of the spirit of Freemasonry. — Res. CaL, 1854.

It is scarcely in the power of a Grand Lodge to say, that
no brother shall use any masonic symbol or emblem to attract
business. — Morris, Am. F. M., iii., 36.

No mason shall exhibit any emblem of the order as a sign
to attract attention to his business. — Const. Mo., 1854.

Many of our brethren, forgetful of their avowal made on
entering its portals, that they are uninfluenced by mercenary
motives, violate this pledge, by placing upon their sign-
boards, vehicles and cards, masonic symbols- and emblems,
which should possibly pertain as a means of advertisement
to those brethren alone who are manufacturers of masonic
clothing and jewels.— G. M. of N. Y., 1855.

Masonic emblems exhibited on sign-boards and business
cards, and worn on the person in the form of jewelry, with
a view to convey the impression that the owner is a member
of the craft, and to promote the business in which they are
engaged, is a most unwarrantable and unmasonic perversion
of our principles to mercenary and unworthy motives. — C.
F. C. of Co., 1857.

THE MASTER — MISCELLANEOUS. 445

The use of masonic emblems on sign-boards, &c., for the
purpose of inviting custom or patronage to one's business,
is most reprehensible, as it degrades the name and charactei
of Masonry, by making it subservient to the groveling pur-
poses of gain. — C. F. C. of Penn., 1851.

Our emblems were intended as media for important moral
and religious instruction, and it must be a desecration of
them to use them for purposes of trade, or to seek, by their
influence, to arrest the custom of a passing traveler, or to
persuade the patronage of a commercial correspondent. —
Mackey, S. C, 1856.

Summons. — Every mason residing in the jurisdiction of a
lodge, is under the strongest obligations to obey the sum-
mons of such lodge, whether such summons be written or
oral, and whether he be a member of such lodge, or of any
lodge or not. Such obligation is binding upon him as a
mason. A neglect or refusal to obey such summons is good
cause for discipline, even to expulsion.

Summonses issued by a lodge, or Master, may be written
or oral. They need not contain any matter except requisition
to attend the lodge, or the Master, when required. Every
master mason, on being so summoned, is bound to attend,
whether he be a member of the lodge or not, if he reside
under its jurisdiction, without question as to the object
thereof. — Regs. 111.

Every mason is bound to obey the summons of a lodge of
master masons, whether he be a member or otherwise. The
obligation is general. — C. W. Moore, F. Mag., i., 36.

The refusal to obey the lodge summons is an offense in
Masonry, which demands stringent discipline. — Swigert, G.
M. Ky., 1858.

Unless the by-laws of the lodge have prescribed the mode,
a summons may be either verbal or written, to compel the
attendance of a mason, emanating from the proper authority.
—Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

446 THE MASTER — MISCELLANEOUS.

Clothing. — The ancient and most appropriate masomn
clothing for funeral processions, is a plain white lambskin
apron, white gloves, and a black dress, including hat. The
officers should wear their official jewels in addition. Sashes,
ornamented aprons, and " regalia," of any kind, we consider
to be entirely out of place in such processions.

For festival, and some other occasions, it may be proper
for members of the higher degrees to wear the clothing
proper for such degrees. They can only do so, however,
when they appear in a body, as such. It is not proper, for
one or more so clothed, to appear in the ranks of a lodge.
They must appear in a body, and as a body.

At masonic funerals, no brother should wear any other
badges, or emblems of Masonry, except a white apron and
gloves, (except the officers of the lodge performing the cere-
mony), who may wear the badges of their office.— Res. La.,
1854.

We prefer (for funerals), plain white aprons and gloves. —
C. W. Moore, 1844.

At funerals, the clothing of brethren shall be white aprons,
white sashes, and white gloves, with the exception of officers,
who shall wear their appropriate jewels. — Res. Min., 1853.

The proper masonic clothing for funeral processions, is the
white lambskin apron, and white gloves. — Iowa, 1857.

Incorporation of Lodges. — Though the incorporation of
subordinate lodges is quite common, we incline to the opinion
expressed in the following extracts, that such incorporation
is at least inexpedient.

In June, 1826, a committee* of the Grand Lodge of Mas-
sachusetts reported, that the incorporation of lodges was in-
expedient, and against the spirit of the masonic constitutions ;
that under an act of incorporation, the members of a lodge
would have a right to hold and manage their funds, inde-
pendently of the Grand Lodge, however in other respects
* John Abbott, John Solet, William J. Whipple.

THE MASTER — MISCELLANEOUS. 44 1

they might misconduct as masons ; that acts of incorporation
must tend to introduce change into the institution, and
changes in the form of masonic government are not consistent
with the spirit of the institution, nor our obligations as mem-
bers of it; that their necessity is disproved by masonic
history, and all masonic experience; that not being neces-
sary, or even advantageous, they are inexpedient. (They
reported the following resolution, which, with the report, was
adopted : ) Resolved, That no subordinate lodge, or any mem-
bers thereof for such lodge, hereafter present to the legis-
lature, any petition for an act of incorporation, and that all
lodges, or members thereof, which have such petitions now
pending, cause the same to be withdrawn. — Proc. Mass., 1826.

No landmark or principle of Freemasonry is violated, in
my opinion, by the incorporation of a masonic lodge. The
question is one of expediency merely. I think there are no
benefits from such incorporation, which cannot be had equally
as well without it, except, possibly, some facilities in manag-
ing law suits. From the peculiar nature of the masonic
institution, great evils and inconvenience have resulted, and
may again result from such incorporation ; and I cannot avoid
the conclusion, that the incorporation of masonic lodges is
inexpedient.— Read, G. M. Del, 1853.

Masonic Beggars. — It is well settled, that no lodge, or in-
dividual member of a lodge, can give a certificate, or recom-
mendation, enabling a mason to go from lodge to lodge, or
place to place, as a pauper, to apply for relief.

• No lodge, or officer, or member of a lodge, shall, under any
circumstances, give a certificate or recommendation, to enable
a mason to go from lodge to lodge, as a pauper, or in an itin-
erant manner to apply to lodges for relief. — Consts. Me., Penn.,
Wis., Canada, England, and Mass.

The Grand Lodge respectfully requests her sister Grand
Lodges to direct their subordinates not to grant relief to any
applicant from tins jurisdiction, unless he produces a certifi-
cate of his present membership in a lodge, or gives other sat-

448 THE MASTER— MISCELLANEOUS.

isfactory evidence of his being an affiliated mason. — S. C,s
1853.

Taxation op Lodges. — In 1853, the Grand Lodge of Arkan-
sas, passed an edict requiring its subordinate lodges to levy
and collect a tax of two dollars per annum from each affiliated
mason, for the benefit of St. John's College. Two lodges re-
fused to comply. At the communication,' in 1854, the Grand
Master argued, that the Grand Lodge had the right to im-
pose the tax. The Grand Lodge, however, repealed the
edict, though a committee reported in favor of the power.
(One of the lodges was suspended, the other apologized.)

These precedents are sufficient to establish the power of
the Grand Lodge to levy and collect taxes, for such purposes
as in its estimation will tend to carry out the great ends of
Masonry. — J. W. S. Mitchell, 1855.

Joint Occupancy of Lodge Rooms. — The better opinion is,
that a lodge room should not be used for any other than
masonic purposes. The joint occupancy of a room by Masons
and Odd Fellows, or other societies, is generally disapproved
of by our best masonic writers, and other authorities.

In future, the lodge room shall not be rented or used for
any other than masonic purposes. — S. C, 1846.

It is very improper to use a lodge room for any other than
masonic purposes. — Hall, G. M., Texas, 1858.

There is certainly nothing in the Constitutions of Masonry
to prohibit the use of masonic lodge rooms for any lawful
purpose. — Morris, Am. F. M., v., 60.

Affirmation. — The question whether or not the degrees
of Masonry may be administered on " affirmation," has fre-
quently arisen, and the decisions upon the point are various
and conflicting. We are of opinion, that conferring the
degrees on affirmation is no violation of the spirit of Free-
masonry, and neither overthrows, nor even affects, a " land-
mark."

The committee, to whom was referred the question, whether

THE MASTER — MISCELLANEOUS. 449

the masonic degrees can be conferred on affirmation, without
oath, reported : that it would not violate any masonic prin-
ciple, or remove any landmark, to confer the degrees on affir-
mation.* [Report Accepted]. — Me., 1823.

Affirmation. — A Quaker's affirmation is binding. — F. M.
London Qu., 1838, 286. Such is not the rule in this country.
—Morris, Am. F. M., iv., 11.

Proximity of Encampments. — There is no constitutional reg-
ulation defining distance between encampments. It is left to
the officer granting dispensation, or Grand Encampment. —
Coin. Juris. G. G. Enc, 1856.

Healing by Resolution. — Healing irregularly made masons,
by resolution, is a violation of the fundamental principles of
Masonry. — Com. N. Y., 1857. A just exposition of law of
Masonry, in such cases. — C. W. Moore.

Vote of Master. — In case of a tie, the Master in the chair
shall be entitled to give a casting vote, except upon a ballot
for initiation or membership. — Const. Eng.

Military Lodges. — No warrant shall be granted for the es-
tablishment of a miiitar}r lodge, without the consent of the
commanding officer of the regiment, battallion, or com-
pany, to which it is to be attached. No military lodge shall,
on any pretense, initiate into Masonry any inhabitant or so-
journer in any town or place at which its members may be
stationed, or through which they may be marching ; nor any
person who does not, at the time, belong to* the military pro-
fession.— Const. Eng.

Membership in Chapter. — It has always been a rule in this
jurisdiction, (Pennsylvania,) that a brother must be a mem-
ber of a symbolic lodge, in order to hold membership in the
chapter or encampment. — Mir. and Key., 1855. We do not
think that the old law, in this state, (Mississipi i,) required
the retaining membership in the former, to continue it in the

* From the proceedings of 1827. we learn that the Grand Lodge of Missouri,
Tenxessee, Kentucky, Delaware, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, denied the right
so to do

450 THE MASTER — MISCELLANEOUS.

Report Investigating Committee. — An entry should never
be made, either on the petition or lodge books, of how the
committee reported. — Smith, G. M. Ark., 1856. It seems to
us that the decision is correct. — C. F. C. Minn., 1858.

Lodge Meetings on the Sabbath — We believe it to be in-
consistent with the principles of ancient Freemasonry for a
lodge to hold any meetings on the Holy Sabbath, for purpose
of work, or any business, except funeral occasions, or cases
of charity. — Res. N. C, 1853. We most heartily subscribe to
it— C. F. C. Mich., 1854. Res. Mich., 1854. The position is a
correct one. — G-. W. 0.

Candidates Who May Propose. — No member who has not
received the degree of master mason shall be permitted to
propose any candidate for admission into Masonry. — Res.
Conn., 1797. We do not so believe. (Vide charge to an E.
A.)_ G. W. C.

By-Laws. — Perhaps this Grand Lodge has no authority to
enforce upon its subordinate lodges a code of by-laws, with-
out their consent. — Sayre, C. F. C. Ala., 1851. We fully con-
cur.— Parvin, C. F. C. Iowa, 1852. We think no such right
exists.— G. W. C.

Censuring Grand Officers. — Subordinate lodges, as such,
have no right to pass resolutions censuring officers of the
Grand Lodge. — Hogin, G. M., Iowa, 1855. Undoubtedly im-
proper to do so. — G. W. C.

A Grand Officer pro tem. not Entitled to Vote. — No
officer pro tem., who is not installed in any Grand office, shall
have a vote as Grand officer. — Const. Md. The above is, in
our opinion, good law. — G. W. C.

Members of Demised Lodge. — Any member of a lodge
which has surrendered its charter, who was in good standing
At the time of such surrender, is entitled to a certificate to
that effect.— Res. Cal, 1858.

THE MASTER — MISCELLANEOUS. 451

Seal. — No document issued over the signati xe of the Sec-
retary is valid without a seal. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii., 66.

Investigating Committee. — A lodge cannot refuse the re-
port of an investigating committee. — Morris, Am. F. M., ii.
67. Undoubtedly correct.— G. W. C.

Substitutes. — It is legal, but not politic, to use one or two
substitutes in conferring the Royal Arch degree. — Morris,
Am. F. M., ii., 170. Though the correctness of the practice
is endorsed by such high authority as the above, and Brother
C. W. Moore, we think either the practice or the * * *
should be amended. — G. W. C.

Recommitment on Appeal. — Where the Grand Lodge, on
appeal from sentence, decide the case to have been irregular
or illegal, and recommit it for new trial ; held, that the party-
is thereby reinstated to the position he occupied when the
charges were preferred in his lodge. — Com. Juris. Va., 1855.

Reconsidering Proceedings. — Proper notice having been
given, a motion to reconsider, ordinary business, (except bal-
loting) at the ensuing meeting, would generally be in order.
— C. W. Moore.

Force of Grand Lodge Resolutions. — There is no question
but that a resolution of the Grand Lodge does not, and can-
not, repeal or amend, or make void, any part of its Constitu-
tion or by-laws. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851. Undoubtedly correct.
— G. W. C.

Special Assessments. — A lodge cannot make any special
assessments, masonically binding upon its members, unless
authority be given by the by-laws. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1851.

Membership in Encampment, &c. — Membership in a lodge
has never been held to be essential to the admission of a can-
didate to either chapter or encampment. — C. W. Moore.

Who Can Dedicate. — It is one of the prerogatives of the
Grand Master to officiate on the dedication of a masonic hail.
If he cannot attend in person, he may appoint a Past Master
to officiate as his proxy. — Hubbard, Ohio, 1853.

INDEX.

Advancement —

Candidates —

Time of, - - - -

235

Jurisdiction Over,

176

Ballot or Vote on, -

237

From Another State,

180

Suitable Proficiency, -

241

Sojourners,

185

Bejected Applicants, -

244

Finishing Work, -

190

Previous Notice,

193

Age of Candidates, -

198

Qualifications of, -

198

Affirmation, -

448

Beligion of,

206

Authenticity of Scriptures,

206

Literary Qualifications -

210

Free-born, ...

211

Appeals —

How Many One Meeting,

213

Bight of, From Sentence,

353

" « " Time,

214

How Taken,

357

" " Degrees,

216

When, ..--

361

Objections to, - -

218

From Decision of Master, -

383

Once Bejected,

230

Previously Bejected,

231

Ballot—

Who Can Propose, -

450

Bight of,

271

Calling Off, - - -

390

Duty to, -

272

Certificates,

426

Who Can, -

273

Commissions of Proxies,

138

Mode of, -

279

Freedom of, -

280

Charter —

Secrecy of, -

284

Charter, ....

Unanimity of,

290

Surrendering,

125

Beconsideration of, -

293

Bestoration,

128

Bepassing, -

296

Visitors May See, -

303

Beggars, - - - -

447

Presence in Lodge, -

412

Bible, -

206

Chair, Who Can Take, 48, 82

Burials, -

414

Clergymen, Admission of, -

436

Business ,-

405

Clothing,

446

Degrees, Abridgment of -

417

By-Laws—

Demitting, Petitioners New

Suspension of, -

389

Lodge,

155

Who Can Prescribe,

450

Deformity of Candidates, -

200

454

INDEX.

Dispensations —

Grand Master— Continued—

Expiration of,

Making Masons at Sight, -

For Initiating, -

- 196

Gambling,

308

"Who May Grant, -

196

Healing, - - - -

449

Dueling, -

- 308

Holy Bible, -

206

Dues, Non-payment,

311

Elections, When, -

- 112

Installation— ■■

What Majorities Elect, -

113

Who Can Install,

Emergencies, -

- 403

Cannot Work until. - - 80, 97

Entered Apprentices, •

On Re-election, -

Expulsions,

- 325

Irregularity not Fatal, -

Fellow Crafts,

By Proxy, ....

Fines,

- 319

In Lodges U. D., -

13S

Intemperance, -

308

Grand Lodges—

Irregular Work, -

410

Origin of,

Jurisdiction —

Date of Organization,

- 15

Of Grand Lodges, (Penal),

Mode of,

" (Territorial)

Style and Title of each,

. 16

Over Grand Master,

Who are Members,

" " Officers,

" " Officers, -

- 20

" Subordinate Officers,

Titles of,

" Members Grand Lodge, 40

Powers, -

- 21

" Sojourners, -

Who Can Install, -

" E. A. and F. C, -

General Powers,

- "22

" Mason under Suspen-

Constitutional,

sion, ....

Territorial Jurisdiction,

. 36

" Non-affiliated Masons,

Penal, ....

" Candidates,

176

Rules of Order, -

- 45

" Unfinished Work, -

190

Quorum,

Concurrent,

Who Can Preside, -

- 48

Miscellaneous,

Vacancies in Office,

Lawful Age, ...

198

Eligibility to, -

- 54

Labor to Refreshment, -

390

Conferring Degrees in, -

Lecturers, (Itinerant),

440

Representatives in, -

- 129

Literary Qualifications, -

210

Do. Absent Lodges,

130

Lodge Rooms, -

448

Grand Master—

Lodges —

Penal Jurisdiction Over,

38,78

Property of, -

119

Powers and Privileges, -

Dispensations for,

Eligibility to Office of,

- 58

Territorial Jurisdiction, -

Vote of, -

Penal, "

INDEX.

455

Lodges— Con tinned —

Non-affiliated Masons—

Petitioners for,

Non-affiliated Masons, -

163

Removal of,

114

Jurisdiction over,

Recommending New Lodges, 153

Right of Visit.

171

Incorporation of, - s

44G

Taxation of,

173

Taxation of, -

448

Objections to Candidates,

218

Military, -

449

Offenses —

Representatives of,

130

OfE. A.andF.C, -

Under Dispensation—

Before Initiation, -

Installation in

139

Sojourners,

Membership in, -

142

Non-affiliated Masons, -

Powers of, - - 145

,149

What are,

307

Representation of,

146

Of Masons under Suspension

Petitioners for,

153

Office—

Membership of Petitioners,

155

Tenure of,

104

Eligibility to,. - - 54,92

Master—

Vacancies in, - 51

108

Title of, ....

Holding More than One, -

Penal Jurisdiction over,

Election to, -

112

Prerogatives, &c, of,

380

Resigning,

104

Appeals from,

383

Cannot Act until Installed,

Vote of, -..-

449

Making Masons at Sight,

Officers —

Titles, ....

Membership —

Powers,-

In Grand Lodge,

Who Can Install,- - 21

,102

Lodges U. D.,

142

Cannot Resign,

104

Petitioners for Lodges, -

155

Censuring, ...

450

Removal don't Forfeit, •

269

Orphans and Widows, -

438

A Duty, ....

247

Past Masters, -

431

Where, - - - -

249

Parliamentary Usages, -

442

Who are Eligible, •

250

Petitioners for New Lodges

, 68

How Admitted, -

252

Duty of, -

153

Rejected Applicants, -

255

Petitions for Degrees, -

226

Double, -

256

" Withdrawal of, -

226

Honorary,

259

" Renewal of,

230

Withdrawal, ■

261

Physical Qualifications, -

200

Mendicants,

447

Property of Lodges,

119

Military Lodges, -

449

Previous Notice, - - -

193

Miscellaneous, ...

444

Proxies to Grand Lodge,

131

Negroes, &c,

211

Profanity,

308

Non-residents, -

185

Processions,

419

456

INDEX.

Punishments—

Suspensions — Continued —

Punishments,

316

Taxation of Lodges, -

448

Fines, ....

319

" of.Non-Aff. Masons, 173

Reprimand,

320

Suspension, ...

321

Trials—

Expulsion, -

325

Charges,

331

Between Lodge and Chapter

,327

Position while Under,

334

Service of Notice, -

337

Quorum —

Examination, -

342

In Grand Lodge,

Testimony, -

345

In Subordinate, -

Judgment,

- 347

Qualifications of Candidates

,198

Punishment, -

351

Records, -

423

Vacancies in Office, 51, 81

,108

Rejections, -

230

Visitation —

Removal of Lodges, -

114

Non- Affiliated Masons, -

171

Re-installation,

Religion of Masonry, -

206

Right of,

Avouchal,- ...

298
303

Representatives of Lodges,
129

,146

Visitors Cannot Ballot, -
Voting —

276

Restorations—

Mode of ,

374

Who Can Restore, -

362

What Majorities,

375

After Suspension,

369

Warrant, (See " Charter.")

What Vote Necessary, -

370

Wardens,

Sabbath, - - -

450

Withdrawal of Petitions, -

226

Scriptures, ...

206

Widow and Orphan, -

438

Slander, - -

308

Who Can Preside, - 48, 82

Special Meetings, -

397

Sojourners, - - 69, 79

,185

Work—

Summonses, -

445

In Grand Lodge,

Making Masons at Sight,

SUSPENSIONS —

Officers First Installed, -

While Under,

Finishing, ...

190

Of Membership, -

321

How may Degrees,

216

Definite, - - - -

321

" " Candidates, 213

,214

Indefinite, .

322

Irregular, (what is,) -

410

89*

,A <* ^ • • •

4* **

. y<£&k.\ /.*&%. /^afc-.°<

^ t • « • -. ^ (T t • ' ' #

. » * A

oc,

^0<

4°.*

•4-V

6*"*

P *1k - «

* A ^

• • ©

1»V

iv . » •

<> ' v 0*v "v "•?.?• \-A" ^v*

HECKMAN

BINDERY INC. 181

k SEP 89

N. MANCHESTER,
INDIANA 46962

,^%

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Digest of masonic law:"

See other formats